CONTENTS
JSMAM VOLUME
9 , NUMBER 4 - FALL 2009
From the Editor
7
by Dan C. Weilbaker, Ph.D.
ACADEMIC ARTICLES
Psychological Climate Dimensions as Antecedents to Salespeople’s
Organizational Commitment, Turnover, Success Beliefs and
Performance
8
By Jeffery K. Sager, Alan J. Dubinsky, and Phillip H. Wilson
Psychological Empowerment of Salespeople: Antecedents and
Consequences
By Rolph E. Anderson, Srinivasan Swaminathan and Frederick Hong-kit Yim
Does the Quality of Consulting Related Behaviors Mediate the
Relationship Between Those Behaviors and Salesperson Effectiveness?
28
43
By Alfred M. Pelham and Louis Tucci
APPLICATION ARTICLE
How to Minimize Realignment Issues: A Case Study
66
By Chuck Howlett
Mission Statement
The main objective of the journal is to provide a focus for collaboration
between practitioners and academics for the advancement of application,
education, and research in the areas of selling and major account management.
Our audience is comprised of both practitioners in industry and academics
researching in sales.
©2009 By Northern Illinois University. All Rights Reserved. ISSN: 1463-1431
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Strategic Partner
Northern Illinois University
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Subscription Form
Name
Company
Title
Address
City
State
Zip
Country
E-Mail
Phone
Fax
Subscription Type
Domestic Individual— $50
Domestic Corporate— $60
Foreign Individual – $70
Foreign Corporate— $80
Payment Method
Check Enclosed
Please Bill Me
Card Type: Visa Mastercard
Credit Card
Discover
American Express
Name as it appears on card
Card Number
Exp. Date
Signature
Mail This Form to:
Dr. Dan C. Weilbaker
JSMAM
Northern Illinois University
DeKalb, IL 60115
Or Fax this Form to:
JSMAM
Attn: Dr. Dan C. Weilbaker
(815) 753-6014
We appreciate your help!
If you know of colleagues who might benefit and would be interested in
subscribing to The Journal of Selling & Major Account Management,
please forward one of the subscription forms.
Thank-you,
Dan C. Weilbaker, Editor
Place
Stamp
Here
Dr. Dan C. Weilbaker
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Department of Marketing
128 Barsema Hall
Northern Illinois University
DeKalb, IL 60115
FOLD HERE
Academic Article
Fall 2009
Manuscripts
1.Articles for consideration should be sent by email to Editor: Dan C. Weilbaker, Department of Marketing Northern
Illinois University, DeKalb, IL 60115 dweilbak@niu.edu.
2. Articles in excess of 6000 words will not normally be accepted. The Editor does welcome shorter articles and case
studies.
3. A manuscript should be submitted via email to the Editor in Microsoft Word format, with author's name(s) and
title of the article. Contributors are advised to check by telephone that submissions have been received. Neither the
editor nor Northern Illinois University, Department of Marketing accepts any responsibility for loss or damage of any
contributions submitted for publication in the Journal.
Biographical note - supply a short biographical note giving the author(s) full name, contact information,
appointment, institutions or organization / company and recent professional attainments.
Synopsis - an abstract not exceeding 100 words should be included.
Diagrams / text boxes / tables - should be submitted without shading although a copy of how the authors
wishes the diagram to appear shaded may be submitted by way of illustrative example. These should be
numbered consecutively and typed on separate pages at the end of the article with an indication in the text
where it should appear.
References - should be cited using the Harvard method. No footnotes should be used for references or
literature citations. Wherever possible, full bibliographic details (e.g., volume number issue number or date,
page numbers publisher year of publication) should be included.
Footnotes - for clarification or elaboration should be used very sparingly. Footnotes should be typed at the
bottom of the page and numbered consecutively throughout the text.
4. Any article or other contribution submitted must be the original unpublished work of the author(s) not submitted
for publication elsewhere.
5. Manuscripts should be formatted on 8 1/2” x 11” paper with all margins of 1" and double-spaced. Font style
should be Times New Roman in 12 pitch.
6. Cross references should not be to page numbers but to the text accompanying a particular footnote.
7. An address for correspondence (including Email address) should be supplied as well as a telephone and fax number
at which the author(s) may be contacted.
8. Authors undertake the responsibility to check that the manuscript should be free of grammatical, syntax or spelling
errors. The Editor reserves the right not to accept any manuscript in which excess alterations or corrections need to be
made.
PERMISSIONS
Subscriptions
To subscribe to Journal of Selling & Major Account Management, please go to www.cob.niu.edu/jsmam/subscription.asp or mail
the subscription form to The Journal of Selling & Major Account Management,. 128 Barsema Hall, Northern Illinois University,
DeKalb, IL 60115. Subscription prices are: U.S. Individual-$50; U.S. Corporation-$60; Foreign Individual-$70; Foreign
Corporation-$80.
EDITORIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF
EDITOR—Dan C. Weilbaker, Ph.D.
McKesson Pharmaceutical Group
Professor of Sales
Department of Marketing
Northern Illinois University
dweilbak@niu.edu
EUROPEAN EDITOR—Kevin Wilson
Sales Research Trust
Peyrenegre
47350 Labretonie
France
Kevin@sales-research-trust.org
ASSISTANT—Joey Lata
Administrative Assistant
Professional Sales Program
Department of Marketing
Northern Illinois University
jlata@niu.edu
Vol. 9, No. 4
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
EDITORIAL BOARD
Ramon A. Avila
Earl D. Honeycutt
Ball State University
Elon University
Terri Barr
Thomas N. Ingram
Miami University—Ohio
Colorado State University
Jim W. Blythe
Mark C. Johlke
University of Glamorgan
Bradley University
Pascal Brassier
Buddy LaForge
ESC Clermont - Graduate School of
Management
University of Louisville
Terry W. Loe
Steven Castleberry
Kennesaw State University
University of Minnesota—Duluth
Daniel H. McQuiston
William L. Cron
Butler University
Texas Christian University
Peter Naude
Laura Cuddihy
Manchester Business School
Dublin Institute of Technology
Stephen Newell
René Y. Darmon
Western Michigan University
ESSEC Business School
Nikolaos Panagopoulos, Ph.D.
Dawn R. Deeter-Schmelz
Athens University of Economics & Business
Ohio University
Robert Peterson
Bill Donaldson
Northern Illinois University
Aberdeen Business School
Nigel F. Piercy
Sean Dwyer
University of Warwick
Louisiana Tech University
Richard E. Plank
Paolo Guenzi
University of South Florida, Lakeland
SDA Bocconi
Ellen Bolman Pullins, PhD
John Hansen
University of Toledo
University of Alabama—Birmingham
David Reid
Jon M. Hawes
Bowling Green State University
Indiana State University
Gregory A. Rich
Bowling Green State University
Northern Illinois University
Fall 2009
From the Editor
We are finally catching up with our publishing. This is the final issue of the 2009
Journal and we are well on our way to having two of the 2010 issues published
before the end of the year. I want to thank the entire faculty that has submitted
their work for consideration and all of the reviewers that do the work that they
do to provide quality contributions. To completely catch up we still are in need
of both academic contributions as well as practitioner articles.
As a relatively new journal, we continue to work towards at least break-even with
subscriptions since we do not accept advertising. We can use your help in getting the word out about the journal. Please consider passing along the subscription forms in the
journal to your friends, associates or colleagues.
In this issue we provide three academic articles and one practitioner article.
The first academic article comes from authors that have published in some of the leading journals
in our profession but they are new to the Journal. Their article deals with the salespersons psychological climate and how it acts as precursor to performance, turnover, success beliefs and organizational commitment (which has been a hot topic over the past few years).
The second academic article is also from authors new to the Journal. Their article addresses the
concept of psychological empowerment and looks at the consequences of the issue as well as the
precursors.
The third and final academic article is from an author that has published previously in the Journal.
This article addresses impact of the quality of salesperson consulting behaviors and the salesperson’s effectiveness.
The application article in this issue provides some new insights into how to manageterritory realignments that minimizes distractions and maximizes performance. The article takes the reader
through a process and provides tips on how to have a new district up and running without the
usual dip in performance as well as increasing the salesperson accountability for their new territory and helping other district salespeople.
Our continued thanks also go to the University Sales Center Alliance for their financial support to
help the journal while we build our subscriber base. Our thanks also go to the dedicated members
of the Editorial Review Board and our ad hoc reviewers.
Dan C. Weilbaker, Ph.D.
Editor, The Journal of Selling & Major Account Management,
McKesson Pharmaceutical Group Professor of Sales,
Northern Illinois University
Vol. 9, No. 4
8
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
PSYCHOLOGICAL CLIMATE DIMENSIONS AS ANTECEDENTS
TO SALESPEOPLE’S ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT, TURNOVER,
SUCCESS BELIEFS, AND PERFORMANCE*
By Jeffery K. Sager, Alan J. Dubinsky and Phillip H. Wilson
Organizational climate plays an important role in a sales force environment. This study examines
several dimensions of salespeople’s climate perceptions relative to performance and job turnover using
organizational commitment and success beliefs as mediator variables. Direct and indirect relationships
between constructs are tested using data obtained from a sample of telecommunications service
salespeople.
Study findings highlight the notion that salespeople’s perceptions of a firm’s senior management,
immediate sales manager, support (non-sales) personnel, and the job directly and positively influence
salesperson organizational commitment. In addition, a direct, positive relationship was observed
between organizational commitment and salespersons’ success beliefs and between salespeople’s
success beliefs and sales performance. A direct, inverse relationship between salespeople’s
organizational commitment and job turnover was also obtained.
Study results generally supported the proposed indirect mediating relationships. Through their direct
relationships with organizational commitment, salespeople’s climate perceptions of non-sales
employees, sales managers, senior management, and the job itself were related indirectly and positively
to success beliefs. Also, organizational commitment, through success beliefs, was associated indirectly
and positively to performance. The posited indirect relationship between salesperson climate
perceptions and job turnover via organizational commitment, however, was not found.
A variety of factors affect job responses (e.g.,
performance, turnover) of employees at any
organizational level and position. Empirical
research shows that an individual-level factor
that can have an impact on salespeople’s jobrelated outcomes in particular is psychological
(organizational) climate (e.g., Brown and Leigh
1996; Tyagi 1982). Notwithstanding its
importance, the impact of psychological climate
on salespeople’s performance and organizational
commitment has been virtually ignored (see
Brown and Leigh [1996] for an exception).
The paucity of work in the foregoing area is
surprising for several reasons. First, extant work
has ascertained that psychological climate has an
effect on such salesperson outcomes as
motivation (e.g., Tyagi 1982), satisfaction (e.g.,
Northern Illinois University
Evans, Landry, and Zou 2007), empowerment
(Martin and Bush 2006), and job involvement
and effort (e.g., Brown and Leigh 1996). Given
that salespeople’s views of their work
environment affect these foregoing job
responses, logically one can presuppose that
similar associations would hold for performance
and organizational commitment. Second,
examining relationships between psychological
climate and performance and organizational
commitment appears warranted owing to the
fact that these latter two variables are the chief
outcomes of interest to researchers in
organizational behavior and to employers and
employees (Colquitt, Lepine, and Wesson 2009).
Therefore, ignoring these associations in a
selling context appears questionable. Third,
Fall 2009 9
Academic Article
managers can have an impact on an employee’s
psychological climate based on the interventions
they take in helping shape the individual’s
climate (e.g., Evans, Landry, and Zou 2007).
Therefore, sales managers should have interest
in ascertaining the efforts they can take to
enhance salespeople’s work climate perceptions.
Accordingly, the present study proposes and
tests a model that links the way a salesperson
perceives the context or climate of a work
organization to his or her performance and
organizational commitment. Climate is posited
to have a positive impact on salespeople’s
organizational commitment, which in turn is
presumed to have a favorable effect on their
success beliefs (a component of motivation).
Success beliefs are posited to be positively
associated with performance. Additionally, the
linkage between organizational commitment and
job turnover is examined to replicate previous
work which has found that the former variable
is a strong predictor of the latter (e.g., Sager,
1990).
CONCEPTUAL
HYPOTHESES
FRAMEWORK
AND
Psychological climate, organizational
commitment, success beliefs, turnover, and
performance of sales personnel are the study
variables and represent a web of potential
phenomena that are interrelated. Based on
previous empirical work, specific relationships
explored in the investigation are described
below and depicted in Figure 1.
Dimensions of Psychological Climate
Psychological climate of an organization is an
individual-level construct comprising descriptive
beliefs or perceptions held concerning work
experiences (e.g., Denison 1996; James and
James 1989). It encompasses an individual’s
perceptions of the characteristics of the
organization as well as the nature of the
Figure 1
Specific Relationships Explored
Perception of Senior
Management Behavior
(H
1)
(H
5;H
6)
Perception of Work
Group Behavior
(H7)
(+)
(H1)
(+)
(H5;
H 6)
Perception of Outside Group Behavior
(
(+)
H1)
)
;H6
(H5
(H
Organizational
Commitment
Behavior
(H2)
(+)
(+)
1) 6)
(H 5;H
Perception of
Management Behavior
(+)
Success
Beliefs
(H3)
Performance
(+)
(+)
(H4)
(H
(H 1)
5;H
6)
(-)
Perception of Job
Turnover
Vol. 9, No. 4
10
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
relationships that person has with those with
whom he or she works (Churchill, Ford, and
Walker 1976). Employees appraise their work
situation vis-à-vis whether it will be beneficial or
harmful for their organizational well being
(James and James 1989). As Brown and Leigh
(1996, p. 359) aver: “It is important to study
psychological climate because it is employee’s
perceptions and valuations of the
environment…that mediates attitudinal and
behavioral responses.”
Scholars differ regarding the components of
psychological climate (James et al. 2007).
Distilling the work on psychological climate by
Brown and Leigh (1996), Denison (1996), and
James and James (1989), five climate dimensions
were used in the present work:
(a)
Perceptions of immediate work group
behavior (i.e., behavior and attitudes of
immediate coworkers)
(b)
Perceptions of outside work group
behavior (i.e., behavior and attitudes of
extended or distal work groups in the
organization)
(c)
Perceptions of behaviors
immediate manager or supervisor
of
the
(d)
Perceptions regarding the
“organization” itself (e.g., senior management
behavior)
(e)
Job-related perceptions (i.e., the job
itself: its task components, customers, products,
and performance objectives)
The dimensions of climate categories
correspond to the argument James and James
(1989) advance that people are able to categorize
perceptions toward jobs, leaders, work groups,
and individual/organizational interfaces into
separate internal compartments.
Selected Consequences of Salespeople’s
Psychological Climate
Organizational Commitment. Mowday, Porter, and
Steers (1982, p. 27) define organizational
Northern Illinois University
commitment as “the relative strength of an
individual’s identification with and involvement
in a particular organization.” It comprises both a
positive affective attachment to and a behavioral
intention to continue working in organization
and is a form of attachment extant between
employees and their company (Jaramillo, Mulki,
and Marshall 2003).
Success Beliefs. Bagozzi (1992, p. 182) characterizes
success beliefs as the extent to which an individual
believes that performing a goal-directed behavior
results in success (´a la instrumentality of a
behavior): “[an individual’s] predictions that if
one tries to perform a goal-directed behavior,
success or failure will result.” Success beliefs
refer to an individual’s predictions regarding the
consequences of performing a behavior (i.e.,
achieving or not achieving the goal) (Bagozzi,
1992). They do not pertain to one’s beliefs
regarding ability to perform a behavior (selfefficacy) (Bagozzi and Warsaw 1990; Bandura
1977) or to feelings of success (the degree of felt
success employees hold concerning their overall
performance) (Brown, Cron, and Leigh 1993).
Success beliefs have not been examined in prior
work in sales.
Job Turnover. Job turnover refers to a
salesperson’s departure from membership in the
firm. It is an extreme form of withdrawal
whether voluntary or involuntary. In some cases
turnover can have a salutary impact (e.g., when a
poor performer opts to decamp from the
company) (Jolson, Dubinsky, and Anderson
1987). When widespread, however, turnover of
sales personnel can have a detrimental effect in
an organization (Hair et al. 2009).
Job Performance. Salesperson performance can be
defined as execution of salesperson behaviors
and the results of those behaviors on the
achievement of organizational goals.
Academic Article
Performance can be viewed on both behavior
and outcome bases (Oliver and Anderson 1994).
In addition, it can have an impact on such issues
as selection, recruitment, training, compensation,
and supervision of sales personnel (Hair et al.
2009).
Hypotheses
Relationship between Psychological Climate and
Organizational Commitment. Researchers
investigating antecedents of organizational
commitment have ascertained that it is associated
with several contextual variables: leader behavior
(Morris and Sherman 1981), job characteristics
(Hunt, Chonko, and Wood 1985), commitment
to top management goals (Reichers 1986),
person-job fit (Werbel, Landau, and DeCarlo
1996), person-organization fit (Vilela et al. 2007),
attitudes toward work, manager, and coworkers
(Sager 1990), and manager behaviors (Agarwal
and Ramaswami 1993). As such, we propose that
salespeople’s perceptions regarding their
immediate manager, coworkers and other work
groups, upper management, and the job itself are
positively related to organizational commitment
(Sager and Johnston 1989). This expectation
corresponds to scholars’ belief that
organizational commitment is an outcome of
socialization (e.g., Dubinsky et al. 1986; Sparks
and Schenk 2006). Therefore, salespeople’s
favorable perceptions of organizational climate
involving the sales manager, other groups in the
organization, fellow salespeople, and upper
management developed through initial and
ongoing socialization should heighten initial
commitment to the organization (Muchinsky
2003).
Hypothesis 1: Salespeople’s perceptions of their
psychological climate are
positively related to their organizational
commitment.
Fall 2009 11
Relationship between Organizational Commitment and
Success Beliefs. As noted, Bagozzi (1992)
characterizes success beliefs as to what extent an
individual believes that performing a goaldirected behavior causes success. Blau and Boal
(1987) promulgate that individuals possessing
high organizational commitment and high job
involvement (i.e., commitment to one’s work)
are more likely to exert effort toward completing
task-related activities as well as toward
maintaining group membership. Essentially, they
herald that involved, committed employees
(“stars”) may be more motivated. The study
model extends Blau and Boal’s (1987) ideas in
that instead of interacting with job involvement,
organizational commitment influences
performance of salespeople through success beliefs.
We postulate that identification with the
organization and willingness to expend effort
toward its goals (i.e., commitment to an
organization) lead a salesperson to actively
attempt to search for, learn, and absorb
information relevant to the selling task, thus
heightening success beliefs.
Hypothesis 2: Salespeople’s organizational
commitment is positively related to
their success beliefs.
Relationship between Success Beliefs and Sales
Performance. Seligman (1998) theorizes that
learned optimism—the evaluation of events and
issues from a positive perspective—can be
learned and that such learned optimism leads to
rewards and fulfillment in a person’s life. Indeed,
sales researchers have proposed that optimism
and positive emotions can influence salespeople
advantageously (e.g., Dixon and Schertzer 2005;
Sujan 1999), but negative emotions can have a
deleterious impact (e.g., Verbeke and Bagozzi
2000). Bagozzi’s (1992) notion of success beliefs
reflects the idea that a salesperson can teach
him/herself to be positive in perspective.
Vol. 9, No. 4
12
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Success beliefs may affect one’s “proximal
motivation”: “…self-regulated processes aimed
at the initiation and execution of goal attainment
actions” (Jaramillo et al. 2007, 59). Whether the
individual actually achieves set goals is predicated
on the goal-directed behavior chosen and factors
that facilitate and impede goal setting (Bagozzi
1992). Schulman (1999) observes that optimistic
expectations have been found to be related
positively to motivation and performance for
employees in several research populations, sales
among them.
Hypothesis 3: Salespeople’s success beliefs are
positively related to sales performance.
Organizational Commitment and Turnover Behavior.
Research findings across workplace contexts
support a negative relationship between
organizational commitment and intention to
quit, a frequently used surrogate for turnover
(e.g., Pettijohn, Pettijohn, and Taylor 2007).
Moreover, organizational commitment has been
ascertained to be a predictor of job turnover
(e.g., Jaramillo et al. 2009). The study model
proposes that organizational commitment
mediates between climate dimensions and
turnover.
Hypothesis 4: Salespeople’s organizational
commitment is inversely related to job
turnover.
Support for Organizational Commitment and Success
Beliefs as Mediator Variables. The study model
suggests that organizational commitment and
success beliefs are mediator variables (Figure 1).
Specifically, organizational commitment is
expected to mediate relationships between
salespersons’ climate perceptions and success
beliefs and between climate perceptions and
turnover behavior. Commitment is presumed to
strengthen the relationship between climate
dimensions and success beliefs and turnover. The
Northern Illinois University
model also implies that salespeople’s success
beliefs mediate the relationship between
organizational commitment and sales
performance. Reasoning holds that success
beliefs enhance the relationship between
commitment and performance of sales
personnel.
Findings from organizational behavior research
support a direct relationship between
organizational commitment and performance
(e.g., Becker et al. 1996). Recent research in the
selling domain has found that organizational
commitment is positively associated with
salesperson performance (Mulki et al. 2008).
Furthermore, a meta-analysis of the
organizational commitment-performance nexus
observed that the link between the two variables
is stronger for sales employees than for nonsales employees (Jaramillo, Mulki, and Marshall
2003). Notably, though, organizational
commitment explained only six percent of the
variance in job performance. This finding
implies that other mediating factors (such as
success beliefs) between the two variables
account for some of the unexplained variance
between organizational commitment and
performance.
As such, the study model reflects the belief that
commitment influences performance through
success beliefs. Salespeople responding
positively to the climate of their organization are
presupposed to be more committed, to have
stronger beliefs regarding their potential success
in the market, and to be effective performers.
Implications of the mediating role of the two
variables are that the bulk of socialized influence
for climate variables works through
organizational commitment and that the impact
of climate on performance works through
organizational commitment and success beliefs.
Hypotheses five and seven convey these
Fall 2009 13
Academic Article
expectations. Hypothesis six clarifies the
expectation that salespersons’ organizational
commitment mediates the influence of climate
on retention of salespeople. A positive climate
builds commitment, and commitment reduces
turnover.
Hypothesis 5: Salespeople’s organizational
commitment mediates the relationship
between salespeople’s psychological climate
perceptions and success beliefs.
Hypothesis 6: Salespeople’s organizational
commitment mediates the relationship
between psychological climate perceptions
and job turnover.
Hypothesis 7: Salespeople’s success beliefs
mediate the relationship between
organizational commitment and salesperson
performance.
METHOD
Participants and Survey Administration
Data were obtained through a survey of
salespersons employed in the publishing arm of a
large telecommunications firm. A salesperson in
each district office was selected to administer the
survey during a weekly sales meeting. The survey
instrument tapped salespersons’ climate
perceptions regarding district sales managers,
sales divisions, senior management, other work
groups, and their job, as well as their withdrawal
intentions. The company provided sales
performance and employment status data.
The sample consisted of 343 salespersons drawn
from fourteen sales divisions. Using an area
canvass system, these salespersons sold Yellow
Page advertising services to businesses. A total of
290 completed usable surveys were received, for
an 85 percent response rate.
Questionnaire
The researchers reviewed relevant literature in
sales management and organizational psychology
to obtain the items that tapped the constructs of
interest. The pre-survey process also included indepth interviews with germane host company
personnel. The final survey instrument contained
50 items designed to represent the seven
constructs included in the proposed model. All
survey items were responded to on a 7-point
Likert-type format, anchored by 1 = Strongly
Disagree and 7 = Strongly Agree. Shown in
Table 1 are the items used to represent the study
constructs.
The measures tapping psychological climate came
from a panoply of sources. Both perceptions of
work-group behavior and of outside group behavior
were based on operationalizations offered by
Dubinsky et al. (1986), James and James (1989),
and Strutton, Pelton, and Lumpkin (1993).
Drawing from James and James (1989),
Netemeyer et al. (1997), Sager, Yi, and Futrell
(1998), and Tyagi (1985), items were developed
to measure salespersons’ perceptions of the
immediate sales manager’s behavior. Six items specific
to the context were identified as representing a
salesperson’s perception of senior management
behavior. Based on the work of Brown and Leigh
(1996), James and James (1989), and Tyagi
(1982), four items were used to represent
salespeople’s job-related perceptions.
The nine-item version of the Organizational
Commitment Questionnaire (Mowday, Porter,
and Steers 1982) was adapted to measure
organizational commitment. Based on the
operationalizations offered by Bagozzi (1992),
five items were developed to capture success beliefs.
Year-to-date percentage of the budgeted sales
target achieved by a salesperson—the host
company performance index—was used as an
index of sales performance.
Vol. 9, No. 4
14
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Table 1
Scale Items and Construct Reliability
Scale Items
Cronbach’s
Alpha
Perceptions of Manager Behavior:
My DSM coaches me on a regular basis.*
My DSM effectively fends for our unit.*
I can trust my DSM to back me on the decisions I make.*
My DSM reinforces what I learned in XXX when I started.*
My DSM explains the rationale behind any corrective counseling action.*
My DSM listens to my side of any issue first.*
I respect my DSM.*
My DSM understands my personality.*
My DSM manages all reps consistently.*
My DSM gives me good suggestions regarding problems I encounter in selling.*
I only hear from my DSM when something goes wrong. (R)
My DSM holds my non-work obligations against me. (R)
My DSM tries to schedule canvasses to fit around my personal needs.
My DSM handles many of the details that would otherwise be dumped on me.
% = .93
Organizational Commitment:
Taking a job with XXX was one of my better decisions in life.*
I think about leaving XXX every day. (R)*
I cannot see myself working for another company.*
I doubt I will be with this company six months from now. (R)*
I regularly circulate my resume to other employers. (R)*
Once I have established a track record here, I will start looking for another job. (R)*
I plan to search for another sales job in the near future. (R)*
XXX has shown a great deal of commitment to me.
I took this job knowing that I will probably leave in a year or two. (R)
% = .89
Perceptions of Senior Management Behavior:
Senior management recognizes the contributions of the sales force.*
Senior management makes decisions with the long run in mind.*
Senior management sees that I have all the resources (technology, support) I need to sell.*
I see little evidence that senior management trusts the sales force. (R)*
Senior management cares about the opinions of sales reps, DSMs, and DMs.*
My DM helps us see where our efforts fit into XXX’s business strategy.
% = .84
Perceptions of Work Group Behavior:
The atmosphere in my division helps me stay focused.*
I look forward to hearing from other salespeople during the day.*
The enthusiasm in my division is contagious.*
People in this division care about one another.*
In this division, issues and concerns are out in the open.*
If I have a problem, there is always someone here who will help me.
Others in my division took time to show me the ropes
Northern Illinois University
% = .79
Fall 2009 15
Academic Article
Table 1 - continued
Scale Items and Construct Reliability
Scale Items
Cronbach’s
Alpha
Perceptions of Job:
My goal is to provide the advertiser with a plan that will bring them more business.*
I really feel the products we sell help independent business people succeed.*
My sales efforts are very valuable to XXX.*
My goal is to exceed the budget, that’s all. (R)
% = .78
Perceptions of Outside Group Behavior:
I have to fight the system outside the division to place orders. (R)*
Non-sales groups within XXX delay me in selling my ads. (R)*
I find it unpleasant to deal with account management. (R)*
I spend a disproportionate amount of time each day contacting non-sales operating areas. (R)
Reps in other divisions use XXX policy against me. (R)
% = .65
Success Beliefs:
Performance targets are achievable*
I am always uncertain that I will make budget. (R)*
I am 80 percent confident that I can make or exceed the budget every pay period*
I am confident I could move up in this organization if I so desire.
I have trouble making budget because of outside responsibilities. (R)
% = .65
* Denotes items retained for structural model measurement.
(R) denotes items that were reverse scored.
Note: DSM = District Sales Manager (first-line manager); DM = Division Manager (manages several districts).
Salesperson employment status (stayed with or
left the firm) over the eight-month interval
following administration of the survey was used
to measure turnover.
RESULTS
Measurement Model
Initial factor analysis results revealed that ten of
the fifty items in the measurement model crossloaded on multiple constructs or failed to load
sufficiently. Consequently, these ten items were
eliminated from further analysis. Subsequent
analyses conducted with the remaining forty
items supported a seven-factor structure
(eigenvalues > 1.0; 61 percent of total item
variance explained). Item loadings corresponded
to the hypothesized constructs, thus suggesting
suitable dimensionality (Table 2).
Confirmatory factor analyses conducted as
suggested by Anderson and Gerbing (1988),
yielded acceptable model indices. Four items,
though, exhibited unacceptably low squared
multiple correlations and standardized loadings.
After eliminating these four items, the respecified 36-item measurement model generated
the following indices: χ2 (573 n = 290) = 892.19,
p = .00; standardized RMR = .05; GFI = .86;
AGFI = .83; NFI = .85; TLI = .93; CFI = .94;
and RMSEA = .042. Thus, the overall
measurement model fit was within ranges
expressed by Hu and Bentler (1999) and
Williams and Holahan (1994). Subsequent
structural analyses of the seven constructs
established their discriminant validity (Table 3).
Vol. 9, No. 4
16
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Table 2
Summary of Loadings for the Measurement Model
Sq.
Std.
MultiConstructs and Items
Loadple R
ings
Perceptions of Manager Behavior
My DSM coaches me on a regular basis.
My DSM effectively fends for our unit.
I can trust my DSM to back me on the decisions I make.
My DSM reinforces what I learned in XXX when I started.
My DSM explains the rationale behind any corrective counseling
action.
My DSM listens to my side of any issue first.
I respect my DSM.
My DSM understands my personality.
My DSM manages all reps consistently.
My DSM gives me good suggestions regarding problems I encounter
in selling.
Organizational Commitment
Taking a job with XXX was one of my better decisions in life.
I think about leaving XXX every day. (R)
I cannot see myself working for another company.
I doubt I will be with this company six months from now. (R)
I regularly circulate my resume to other employers (R)
Once I have established a track record here, I will start looking for
another job (R)
I plan to search for another sales job in the near future. (R)
Perceptions of Senior Management Behavior
Senior management recognizes the contributions of the sales force.
Senior management makes decisions with the long run in mind.
Senior management sees that I have all the resources (technology,
support) I need to sell.
I see little evidence that senior management trusts the sales force.
(R)
Senior management cares about the opinions of sales reps, DSMs,
and DMs.
Perceptions of Work Group Behavior
The atmosphere in my division helps me stay focused.
I look forward to hearing from other salespeople during the day.
The enthusiasm in my division is contagious
People in this division care about one another.
In this division, issues and concerns are out in the open.
Perceptions of Job
My goal is to provide the advertiser with a plan that will bring them
more business.
I really feel the products we sell help independent business people
succeed.
My sales efforts are very valuable to XXX.
Northern Illinois University
t-
p<
Value
.46
.70
.75
.65
.48
.
38
.69
.49
.51
.69
.68
.84
.87
.81
.69
.
62
.83
.70
.71
.83
12.87
17.37
18.31
16.35
13.26
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
11.44
17.16
13.45
13.68
17.11
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.60
.79
.34
.70
.48
.42
.78
.83
.59
.84
.69
.65
15.34
17.02
10.57
17.12
13.05
11.98
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.73
.85
17.74
.001
.71
.53
.43
.50
.48
.85
.73
.66
.71
.69
17.06
13.73
12.00
13.18
12.81
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.61
.26
.72
.30
.30
.78
.51
.85
.55
.55
15.03
8.80
16.92
9.51
9.52
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.46
.68
11.58
.001
.69
.83
14.39
.001
.50
.71
12.17
.001
Fall 2009 17
Academic Article
Table 2—continued
Summary of Loadings for the Measurement Model
Constructs and Items
Perceptions of Outside Group Behavior
I have to fight the system outside the division to place orders. (R)
Non-sales groups within XXX delay me in selling my ads. (R)
I find it unpleasant to deal with account management. (R)
Success Beliefs
Performance targets are achievable.
I am always uncertain that I will make the budget. (R)
I am 80 percent confident that I can make or exceed the budget every pay period.
Sq.
Multiple
R
Std.
Loadings
tValue
p<
.34
.61
.25
.58
.78
.50
9.20
12.33
7.86
.001
.001
.001
.67
.25
.25
.82
.50
.48
14.20
8.25
7.92
.001
.001
.001
Descriptive Goodness of Fit Indices:
χ2 (573 N = 290), p=.00
892.19
Standardized RMR
0.051
GFI
0.86
AGFI
0.83
NFI
0.85
TLI
0.93
CFI
0.94
RMSEA
0.042
Structural Model Evaluations (Tests of H1
through H7)
behavior and organizational commitment, however,
were not supported.
A correlation matrix (Table 4) of the summated
construct measures was generated and used to
evaluate the theorized model. To facilitate path
analysis, item loadings of λ=.99 and λ=.95,
respectively, were inserted to represent the directly
observed constructs, performance and turnover.
The theoretical model exhibited the following fit
indices: χ2 (18 n = 290) = 67.21, p = .00;
Standardized RMR = .06; GFI = .96; AGFI = .89;
NFI = .89; CFI = .92; and RMSEA = .089.
A path-by-path assessment of the structural
model was undertaken, per Anderson and
Gerbing (1988). A series of nested models was
evaluated (Table 6), including the structural null,
structural (hypothesized), and saturated models
(Williams and Holahan 1994). Fit indices
indicated the lowest AIC (112.78) and the lowest
RMSEA (.06) for the hypothesized model.
Shown in Table 5 are the standardized path
coefficients along with their t-values and statistical
significance for the hypothesized relationships
(H1 - H7). Portrayed in Figure 2 are the paths
tested along with their standardized path
coefficients. Coefficients tend to provide overall
support for the proposed relationships. All
relationships, direct or indirect, that included a
path between perception of work (sales) group
Support existed for four of the five relationships
tested under H1 (Table 5 and Figure 2).
Salespersons’ perceptions of the (a) behavior of
non-sales employees, (γ12 = .19, t = 1.89, p
< .05), (b) behavior of salespersons’ sales
< .025), (c)
managers, (γ13 = .13, t = 2.11, p
behavior of senior management, (γ14 = .31, t =
2.05, p < .025), and (d) sales job (γ15 = .17, t =
2.71, p
< .005) were related directly and
positively to organizational commitment. The
posited direct, positive relationship between a
Vol. 9, No. 4
18
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Table 3
Assessment of Discriminant Validity: Chi-Square Difference Tests
Models/Construct Pairs
Model χ2
Unconstrained Measurement Model (d.f. = 573): All constructs are independent.
D χ2
p<
1840.93
948.78
.001
1382.47
486.28
.001
1243.27
1212.63
1186.30
347.08
316.44
290.11
.001
.001
.001
1003.19
1127.55
1110.94
1121.53
1107.57
1009.52
989.27
107.00
231.36
214.75
225.34
211.38
113.33
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
892.19
Constrained Models (d.f. = 574): Pairs of constructs constrained to one.
Organizational Commitment & Perception of Manager Behavior
Perception of Senior Management Behavior & Perception of Manager
Behavior
Perception of Senior Management Behavior & Organizational Commitment
Perception of Work Group Behavior & Perception of Manager Behavior
Perception of Work Group Behavior & Organizational Commitment
Perception of Work Group Behavior & Perception of Senior Management Behavior
Perception of Job & Perception of Manager Behavior
Perception of Job & Organizational Commitment
Perception of Job & Perception of Senior Management Behavior
Perception of Job & Perception of Work Group Behavior
Perception of Outside Group Behavior & Perception of Manager Behavior
Perception of Outside Group Behavior & Organizational Commitment
Perception of Outside Group Behavior & Perception of Senior Management Behavior
Perception of Outside Group Behavior & Perception of Work Group
Behavior
Perception of Outside Group Behavior & Perception of Job
Success Beliefs & Perception of Manager Behavior
Success Beliefs & Organizational Commitment
Success Beliefs & Perception of Senior Management Behavior
Success Beliefs & Perception of Work Group Behavior
Success Beliefs & Perception of Job
Success Beliefs & Perception of Outside Group Behavior
93.08
954.91
58.72
.001
996.10
1012.43
990.16
923.70
942.15
953.13
989.46
941.63
99.91
116.24
93.97
27.51
45.96
56.94
93.27
45.44
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
.001
Note: Critical α = .00246; Critical χ2 (1 d.f., p = .001) = 10.828; p = significance level.
salesperson’s perceptions of the behavior of
other salespersons (i.e., work group) in the
organization and his or her organizational
commitment was not supported (γ11 = .08, t
= .60).
H2 received empirical support. A direct, positive
relationship was observed between the extent to
which a salesperson felt committed to the
Northern Illinois University
organization and possessed favorable success
< .001).
beliefs (β21 = .75, t = 11.93, p
Support was also provided for H3, which
posited a direct and positive relationship
between salespeople’s success beliefs and sales
performance (β32 = .44, t = 6.65, p < .001).
As H4 proposed, a direct, inverse relationship
between a salesperson’s organizational
Fall 2009 19
Academic Article
1
Table 4
Correlation Matrix of Study Constructs
2
3
4
5
6
7
1. PERDSM
.93
2. ORGCOM
3. PERSM
4. PERWGRP
5. PERJOB
.304**
.288**
.372**
.182**
.90
.483**
.409**
.259**
.85
.620**
.196**
.79
.265**
.78
6. PEROGRP
.132**
.318**
.459**
.255**
.036
.66
7. SB
8. PERFORM
.174**
.118*
.572**
.276**
.424**
.052
.338**
.046
.177**
.095
.377**
.027
.64
.378**
9. TURNOVER
-.082
-.048
-.090
.059
-.027
-.105
.000
8
9
-.105
*p < .05 (2-tailed); **p < .01 (2-tailed).
Note 1: PERDSM = Perception of Manager Behavior; ORGCOM = Organizational Commitment; PERSM = Perception of Senior Management Behavior; PERWGRP = Perception of Work
Group Behavior; PERJOB = Perception of Job; PEROGRP = Perception of Outside Group Behavior; SB = Success Beliefs; PERFORM = Sales Performance TURNOVER = Voluntary Turnover.
Note 2: Composite reliability coefficients of multi-item measures are reported on the diagonal.
commitment and job turnover was found (β41 =
-.11, t = -1.75, p < .05).
Study findings generally supported the indirect
mediating relationships proposed in H5 (Table
5). Through their direct relationships with
organizational commitment, salespeople’s
perceptions of the (a) behavior of non-sales
employees (γ = .14, t = 1.87, p
<.05), (b)
behavior of sales managers (H (γ = .10, t = 2.08,
p < .025), (c) behavior of senior management
(γ = .23, t = 2.03, p < .025), and (d) job itself
(γ = .13, t = 2.65, p
< .025) were related
indirectly and positively to success beliefs. Only
perceptions of the work group were not found to
be significantly associated (p > .05) with success
beliefs.
H6 did not receive empirical support. The
indirect relationship between salesperson
climate perceptions and job turnover via
organizational commitment was in the desired
direction, but not significant (p > .05). H7,
though, was confirmed. Specifically,
organizational commitment, through success
beliefs, was related indirectly and positively with
performance (γ = .33, t = 6.37, p < .001).
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
Study findings support the overarching
proposition that organizational commitment and
success beliefs mediate (i.e., serve as intermediary
factors between) salespeople’s psychological
climate perceptions, job turnover, and
performance. Apparently, salespeople develop a
deeper commitment to the organization if they
hold auspicious perceptions of their support
personnel, immediate sales manager, senior
management, and job. These findings undergird
previous theoretical conceptualizations and
empirical findings discussed in the socialization
Vol. 9, No. 4
20
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Table 5
Path Model Estimation Results
Direct Relationships
H
Std. Path
t-Value
Sig.
Path
Coeff.
H1
γ11
.08
0.60
n.s
H1
γ12
.19
1.89
.050
H1
γ13
.13
H1
γ14
.31
2.05
.025
H1
γ15
.17
2.71
.005
H2
β21
.75
11.93
.001
H4
β41
-.11
-1.75
.050
.44
6.65
.001
Std. Path
t-Value
Sig.
p≤
Perceptions of Work Group Behavior
Perceptions of Outside Group Behavior
Perceptions of Manager Behavior
2.11
.025
Perceptions of Senior Management Behavior
PERSM ->ORGCOM
Perceptions of Job
Organizational Commitment
ORGCOM -> SB
ORGCOM -> TURNOVER
Success Beliefs
H3
Indirect Relationships
β32
Coeff.
p≤
PERWGRP -> ORGCOM ->SB (H5)
.06
.60
n.s
PEROGRP -> ORGCOM -> SB (H5)
.14
1.87
.050
PERDSM -> ORGCOM -> SB (H5)
.10
2.08
.025
PERSM -> ORGCOM -> SB (H5)
.23
2.03
.025
PERJOB -> ORGCOM -> SB (H5)
.13
2.65
.025
PERWGRP -> ORGCOM -> TURNOVER (H6)
-.01
-.57
n.s
PEROGRP -> ORGCOM -> TURNOVER (H6)
-.02
-1.28
n.s
PERDSM -> ORGCOM -> TURNOVER (H6)
-.01
-1.35
n.s
PERSM -> ORGCOM -> TURNOVER (H6)
-.03
-1.33
n.s
PERJOB -> ORGCOM -> TURNOVER (H6)
-.02
-1.47
n.s
ORGCOM -> SB -> PERFORM (H7)
n.s. = Not significant
.33
6.37
.001
Northern Illinois University
Academic Article
Fall 2009 21
Figure 2
Path Estimates (Standardized Path Coefficients) for the Salesperson Performance
and Turnover Model
(e.g., Schneider and Reichers 1983; Van Maanen
and Schein 1979) and organizational
commitment (e.g., Caldwell, Chatman, and
O’Reilly 1990) literatures. Empirical work in
these two areas suggests the considerable impact
that interactions with both managers and coworkers plays in shaping an employee’s
commitment to the organization.
Importantly, the behavior senior management
models to the sales force has an effect on the
image salespeople carry of the company and its
products (Hair et al. 2009). The positive
relationship observed between salespeople’s
perceptions of the actions taken by senior
management and salespersons’ organizational
commitment is particularly relevant in light of
the finding in this study that such a perception is
more instrumental in shaping commitment to the
organization (γ14 = .31) than are perceptions
regarding the actions of the immediate sales
manager (γ13 = .13).
Salespeople’s perceptions of the working
situation with their immediate sales manager
were found to have a beneficial impact on their
commitment to the firm. Peradventure the
favorable feelings sales personnel have toward
their sales manager induces a personal loyalty
toward that individual, particularly in a
geographically-dispersed sales organization
where the experienced commission salesperson
functions in a semi-autonomous role. Such
salutary affect may conduce to heightened loyalty
to the manager and thus to enhanced
organizational commitment. Further research is
Vol. 9, No. 4
22
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Table 6
Nested Path Models (Comparing Model Fit)
Models
d.f.
χ2
AIC
NFI
TLI
CFI
RMS
Model(UF)
36
619.72
866.01
0
0
0
Model(SN)
26
340.45
396.01
.45
.25
Model(T-1)
19
74.52
118.63
.88
Model(T-1A)
Model(T)
19
18
70.69
67.21
112.96
112.78
Model(T+1)
17
67.13
114.36
Model(SS)
0
0
GFI
AGFI
.28
Std.
RMR
.26
.61
.51
.46
.21
.21
.78
.63
.82
.90
.093
.064
.95
.88
.89
.89
.83
.83
.91
.92
.087
.089
.063
.06
.96
.96
.89
.89
.89
.82
.91
.092
.061
.96
.89
Model(UF) = Model with no correlated factors and no relationships specified for latent variables.
Model(SN) = Path model with correlated exogenous constructs but with no other relationships specified. Model(T-1) = Reduced path model in which the path from perception of identity to organizational commitment is deleted. Model(T-1A) = Reduced Model in which the path from perception of
outside group behavior to organizational commitment is deleted. Model(T) = Model proposed in the
study. Model(T+1) = Proposed model with an added path from perception of manager behavior to
performance. Model(SS) = Fully saturated model.
necessary to explore this possibility.
The findings further indicate that salespeople
who develop greater commitment to the
organization also possess increased success
beliefs and exhibit greater performance. These
linkages are likely based on the nature of
relationship expected between organizational
commitment and sales performance.
Support for indirect relationships between
salespeople’s psychological climate perceptions
and success beliefs suggests that climate
dimensions, through their impact on
organizational commitment, influence the extent
to which salespeople feel positive and optimistic
about achieving the outcomes of their job-related
activities. The more favorable are salespeople’s
perceptions regarding (a) the behaviors and
Northern Illinois University
actions of their immediate superior, (b) the
dedication and direction of senior management,
(c) the capabilities of employees in support
departments, and (d) the nature of their own
jobs, the greater is their commitment to the
organization and the greater is their belief that
performing sales-related activities will result in
success.
As noted in the results section, perceptions of
behaviors of the salespersons in the work group
have little influence on salespersons’
commitment to an organization. As compared to
non-sales members of an organization, the
interaction a salesperson has with other
salespersons at the same level is typically limited.
A salesperson’s job necessitates spending a
significant number of work hours interacting
with current and potential customers and non-
Academic Article
sales (support) workers, thus leaving less time
for interaction with other salespersons in the
work environment. (Salespersons in the study
sample, for instance, worked out of their cars on
area canvasses or in separate offices). Such
isolation may inhibit esprit de corps and impair
social learning, thus not affording the favorable
impact that salesperson propinquity could have
on sales personnel vis-à-vis organizational
commitment.
MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS
Study findings offer several suggestions for sales
management practice. First, the study
demonstrated the important influence both sales
managers and non-sales co-workers play in
shaping a sales employee’s commitment to the
organization. Sales organizations, therefore, need
to exert efforts to strengthen interfaces between
sales personnel and immediate and upper-level
sales management, as well as with non-sales
peers (e.g., order-processing personnel, customer
service employees). Endeavors could include
exchange of critical information among these key
players via formal and informal meetings, written
and electronic correspondence, social settings,
and short-term job rotation. A major goal of
such activities is to provide each party with the
other member’s work perspective.
Second, actions taken by senior management
may well have greater influence on a
salespersons’ commitment to the organization
than their immediate sales supervisor. This
phenomenon may occur because the salesperson
is likely to equate senior management with the
mission, direction, and values of the
organization. Salespeople might view their
immediate sales manager, though, as an entity
separate from sales organization. By articulating
the firm’s objectives and values, senior
management affords sales personnel opportunity
Fall 2009 23
to discern their fit with the company—the more
compatible they are with the organization’s
milieu, the more enhanced is their commitment
to the company.
Third, salespeople’s perceptions of the work
situation with their immediate sales supervisor
can also have a positive impact on their
commitment to the company. If salespeople
possess favorable feelings toward their sales
manager, they might well develop personal
loyalty toward him or her. This enhanced fidelity
to the manager may well foster augmented
organizational commitment. Accordingly, sales
supervisor deportment with sales subordinates
should be mutually beneficial, supportive, and
respectful.
Fourth, an organization should strive to develop
commitment among new salespeople and, as
well, provide sales training that reinforces new
salespersons’ beliefs that success is achievable.
Efforts should be directed at increasing
salespeople’s confidence in their ability to
perform their jobs effectively and efficiently.
Therefore, sales supervisors could provide basic
sales training and ascertain which new
salespeople are to receive that training. An
implication is that basic selling training is needed
in most contexts where new salespeople are
indoctrinated.
Fifth, study results revealed that perceptions of
behaviors of the salespersons in the work group
have little influence on salespeople’s
organizational commitment. Because a
salesperson tends to have limited interaction
with other salespersons in the organization, the
salesperson-sales manager interaction appears to
become more relevant in determining the
salesperson’s relationship with the organization.
Accordingly, the salesperson is likely to become
more dependent on his or her immediate sales
Vol. 9, No. 4
24
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
manager rather than on other sales personnel
for information, support, and feedback. Sales
managers thus need to attend to their sales
subordinates so that sales personnel will feel
comfortable asking their sales manager for
assistance.
Sixth, upper management efforts ultimately can
assist to enhance success beliefs of salespersons
and increase sales force retention.
Organizational commitment can be enhanced by
facilitating a positive psychological work climate.
Ensuring that a salesperson’s psychological
climate is favorable involves regular and positive
interactions with senior management, sales
managers, and support personnel. Cespedes
(1995) suggests structures and mediation that
may facilitate perceptions of a more favorable
work climate.
LIMITATIONS
RESEARCH
AND
FUTURE
Because data were collected through a crosssectional research design, any causal inferences
made must be made with care. Accordingly,
future research should be undertaken
longitudinally. An intriguing research question
is how salespeople’s psychological beliefs
change over time. Additionally, interest could
focus on how those changes influence their
work-related responses.
In using the findings, the nature of the sales
force studied needs to be considered. Results of
this study may, therefore, be more pertinent
only to those sales forces where advertising is
sold or where compensation is largely incentivebased (Yellow Page advertising in the current
work). Conducting similar research with sales
personnel drawn from several types of sales
organizations will increase confidence in the
Northern Illinois University
applicability of the results obtained.
The study model was deliberately underspecified. It omitted other antecedents of
commitment identified in the literature (e.g., job
satisfaction, job involvement, selected
components of motivation) and therefore does
not consider their impact on organizational
commitment or their possible indirect impact on
success beliefs, sales performance, and job
turnover. Absence of key variables likely
affected the goodness of fit indices for the
model. One avenue for future research would be
to include such antecedents and evaluate their
direct and indirect influences on the constructs
examined here.
Finally, the present study used solely an
objective company index to measure sales
performance. Salesperson performance, though,
is multifaceted (Hair et al. 2009). Therefore, a
useful extension to this study could involve the
inclusion of both objective and behavioral
dimensions.
Jeffrey K. Sager , Professor of Marketing,
University of North Texas, Denton, Texas
Email: sager@cobaf.unt.edu
Alan J. Dubinsky, Dillard Distinguished
Professor of Marketing Dillard College of
Business Administration Midwestern State
University 3401 Taft Boulevard , Wichita Falls,
TX 76308 and Research Fellow, Center for
Sales Innovation, St. Catherine University St.
Paul, MN and Professor Emeritus, Purdue
University West Lafayette, IN
Email: dubindksy@purdue.edu
Phillip H. Wilson, Assistant Professor of
Marketing, Midwestern State University,
Wichita Falls, Texas
Email: phillip.wilson@mwsu.edu
Academic Article
REFERENCES
Agarwal, S. and S.N. Ramaswami (1993),
“Affective Organizational Commitment of
Salespeople: An Expanded Model,” Journal of
Personal Selling and Sales Management, 13 (2), 49
-70.
Anderson, J.C. and D.W. Gerbing (1988),
“Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A
Review and Recommended Two-Step
Approach,” Psychological Bulletin, 103 (3), 411423.
Bagozzi, R.P. (1992), “The Self-Regulation of
Attitudes, Intentions, and Behavior,” Social
Psychology Quarterly, 55 (2), 178-204.
Bagozzi, R.P. and P.R.Warsaw (1990), “Trying to
Consume,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17,
127-140.
Bandura, A. (1977), “Self Efficacy: Toward a
Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change,”
Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Becker, T.E. (1992), “Foci and Bases of
Commitment: Are They Distinctions Worth
Making?” Academy of Management Journal, 35,
232-244.
Fall 2009 25
Brown, S.P., W.L. Cron, and T.W. Leigh (1993),
“Do Feelings of Success Mediate Sales
Performance-Work
Attitudes
Relationships?” Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 21 (2), 91-100.
Caldwell, D.F., J.A. Chatman, and C.A. O’Reilly
(1 9 9 0 ), “ Bu ild ing Org aniz at io nal
Commitment: A Multi-Firm Study,” Journal of
Occupational Psychology, 63, 245-261.
Cespedes, F.V. (1995), Concurrent Marketing,
Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Churchill, G.A., N.M Ford, and O.C. Walker
(1976), “Organizational Climate and Job
Satisfaction in the Sales Force,” Journal of
Marketing Research, 13 (November), 323-332.
Colquitt, J.A., J.A. Lepine, and M.J. Wesson
(2009), Organizational Behavior: Improving
Performance and Commitment in the Workplace,
Boston: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Denison, D.R. (1996), “What Is the Difference
between Organizational Culture and
Organizational Climate? A Native’s Point of
View on a Decade of Paradigm Wars,”
Academy of Management Review, 21 (3), 619-654.
Becker, T.E., R.S. Billings, D.M. Eveleth, and
N.L. Gilbert (1996), “Foci and Bases of
Organizational Commitment: Implications
for Job Performance,” Academy of Management
Journal, 39 (2), 464-482.
Dixon, A.L. and S.M.B. Schertzer (2005),
“Bouncing Back: How Salesperson
Optimism and Self-Efficacy Influence
Attributions and Behaviors Following
Failure,” Journal of Personal Selling and Sales
Management, (Fall), 361-369.
Blau, G.J. and K.B. Boal (1987),
“Conceptualizing How Job Involvement and
Organizational Commitment Affect
Turnover and Absenteeism,” Academy of
Management Review, 2 (April), 288-300.
Dubinsky, A.J., R.D. Howell, T.N. Ingram, and
D.N. Bellenger (1986), “Sales Force
Socialization,” Journal of Marketing, 50
(October), 192-207.
Brown, S.P. and T.W. Leigh (1996), “A New
Look at Psychological Climate and Its
Relationship to Job Involvement, Effort, and
Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 81
(4), 358-368.
Evans, K.R., T.D. Landry, and P.L. Zou (2007),
“How Sales Controls Affect Job-related
Outcomes: The Role of Organizational Sales
-Related Psychological Climate Perceptions,”
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35
(Fall), 445-459.
Vol. 9, No. 4
26
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Hair, J.F., R.E. Anderson, R. Mehta, and B.J.
Babin (2009), Sales Management: Building
Customer Relationships and Partnerships, Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company.
Hu, L. and P.M. Bentler (1999), “Cutoff Criteria
for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure
Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New
Alternatives,” Structural Equation Modeling, 6
(1), 1-55.
Hunt, S.D., L.B. Chonko, and V.R.Wood (1985),
“Organizational Commitment in Marketing,”
Journal of Marketing, 49 (Winter), 112-126.
James, L.A. and L.R. James (1989), “Integrating
Work Environment Perceptions:
Explorations into the Measurement of
Meaning,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 74 (5),
739-751.
James, L.R., C.C. Choi, C.H.E. Ko, P.K. McNeil,
M.K. Minton, M.A. Wright, and K. Kim
(2007), “Organizational and Psychological
Climate: A Review of Theory and Research,”
European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 17 (1), 5-32.
Martin, C.A. and A.J. Bush (2006),
“Psychological Climate, Empowerment,
Leadership Style, and Customer-Oriented
Selling: An Analysis of the Sales ManagerSalesperson Dyad,” Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 34 (Summer), 419-438.
Morris, J.H. and D.J. Sherman (1981),
“Generalizability of an Organizational
Commitment Model,” Academy of Management
Journal, 24 (September), 512-526.
Mowday, R.T., L.W. Porter, and R.M. Steers
(1982), Employee-Organization Linkages: The
Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and
Turnover, New York: Academic Press
Inc.1982.
Muchinsky, P.M. (2003), Psychology Applied to
Work, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson
Learning.
Mulki, J.P., W.B. Locander, G.W. Marshall, E.G.
Harris, and J. Hensel (2008), “Workplace
Isolation, Salesperson Commitment, and Job
Performance,” Journal of Personal Selling and
Sales Management, 28 (Winter), 67-78.
Jaramillo, F., J.P. Mulki, and G.W. Marshall
(2005), “A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship
between Organizational Commitment and
Salesperson Job Performance: 25 Years of
Research,” Journal of Business Research, 58, 706
-714.
Netemeyer, R.G., J.S. Boles, D.O. McKee, and
R. McMurrian (1997), “An Investigation into
the Antecedents of Organizational
Citizenship Behaviors in a Personal Selling
Context,” Journal of Marketing, 61 (July), 8598.
Jaramillo, F., D.B. Grisaffe, L.B. Chonko, and
J.A. Roberts (2009), “Examining the Impact
of Servant Leadership on Salesperson’s
Turnover Intentions,” Journal of Personal
Selling & Sales Management, 29 (Fall), 351-365.
Oliver, R.L. and E. Anderson (1994), “An
Empirical Test of the Consequences of
Behavior- and Outcome-Based Sales Control
Systems,” Journal of Marketing, 58 (October),
53-67.
Jolson, M.A., A. J. Dubinsky, and R.A. Anderson
(1987), “Correlates and Determinants of
Sales Force Turnover: An Exploratory
Study,” Journal of Personal Selling and Sales
Management, 7 (November), 9-27.
Pettijohn, C.E., L.S. Pettijohn, and A.J. Taylor
(2007), “Does Salesperson Perception Of
The Importance of Sales Skills Improve
Sales Performance, Customer Orientation,
Job Satisfaction and Organizational
Commitment, and Reduce Turnover?”
Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management,
26 (Winter), 75-88.
Kohli, A.K. (1989), “Effects of Supervisory
Behavior: The Role of Individual
Differences among Salespeople,” Journal of
Marketing, 53 (October), 40-50.
Northern Illinois University
Academic Article
Reichers, A.E. (1986), “Conflict and
Organizational Commitments,” Journal of
Applied Psychology, 71 (August), 508-514.
Sager, J.K. (1990), “How to Retain Salespeople,”
Industrial Marketing Management, 19, 155-166.
Sager, J.K., J. Yi, and C.M. Futrell (1998), “A
Model Depicting Salespeople’s Perceptions,”
Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management,
18 (3), 1-22.
Schneider, B. and A.E. Reichers (1983), “On the
Etiology of Climates,” Personnel Psychology, 36,
19-39.
Schulman, P. (1999), “Applying Learned
Optimism to Increase Sales Productivity,”
Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management,
19 (Winter), 31-38.
Seligman, M.E.P. (1998), Learned Optimism: How
to Change Your Mind and Your Life, New
York: Simon and Schuster, Inc.
Sparks, J.R. and J.A. Schenk (2006),
“Socialization Communication,
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors, and
Sales in a Multilevel Marketing
Organization,” Journal of Personal Selling and
Sales Management, 36 (Spring), 161-180.
Strutton, D., L.E. Pelton, and J.R. Lumpkin
(1993), “The Relationship between
Psychological Climate and Salesperson-Sales
Manager Trust in Sales Organizations,”
Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management,
13 (4), 1-14.
Fall 2009 27
Tyagi, P.K. (1985), “The Effects of Stressful
Organizational Conditions on Salespersons’
Work Motivation,” Journal of Academy of
Marketing Science, 13 (Winter/Spring), 290309.
Van Maanen, J. and E.H. Schein (1979),
“Toward a Theory of Organizational
Socialization,” in B. M. Shaw, editor,
Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwich,
CT: JAI Press, Inc., 86-101.
Verbeke, W. and R.P Bagozzi (2000), “Sales Call
Anxiety: Exploring What It Means When
Fear Rules a Sales Encounter,” Journal of
Marketing, 64 (July), 88-101.
Vilela, B.B., J.A.V. Gonzalez, and L.F. Ferrin
(2007), Person-Organization Fit, OCB and
Performance Appraisal: Evidence from
Matched Supervisor-Salesperson Data Set in
a Spanish Context,” Industrial Marketing
Management, 37 (November), 1005-1019.
Werbel, J., J.Landau, and T.E. DeCarlo (1996),
“The Relationship of Pre-Entry Variables to
Early Employment Organizational
Commitment,” Journal of Personal Selling and
Sales Management, 16 (2), 25-36.
Williams, L.J. and P.J. Holahan (1994),
“Parsimony-Based Indices for MultipleIndicator Models: Do They Work?”
Structural Equation Modeling, 1 (2), 161-189.
Sujan, H. (1999), “Optimism and Street-Smarts:
Identifying and Improving Salesperson
Intelligence,” Journal of Personal Selling and
Sales Management, 19 (Sumer), 17-33.
Tyagi, P.K. (1982), “Perceived Organizational
Climate and the Process of Salesperson
Motivation,” Journal of Marketing Research, 19
(May), 240-254.
Vol. 9, No. 4
28
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT OF SALESPEOPLE:
SALESPEOPLE:
ANTECEDENTS AND CONSEQUENCES
By Rolph E. Anderson, Srinivasan Swaminathan, and Frederick Hong-kit Yim
In this era of customer relationship management (CRM), companies that successfully empower their
salespeople may obtain substantial advantages over competitors. Guided by social cognitive theory, we
analyze the extant empowerment literature to develop an integrative conceptual framework to help sales
managers understand how psychological empowerment of their salespeople may increase customeroriented selling, salesperson job satisfaction, and customer satisfaction. A conceptual model and several
research propositions are presented to advance our understanding of psychological empowerment for
salespeople, followed by a discussion of the implications for academic research and sales management
practice. Finally, guidelines are offered to sales managers for psychologically empowering their
salespeople.
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, employee empowerment has
been garnering heightened attention among
organizational researchers and business
practitioners (Birdi et al. 2008). Growing interest
in the empowerment concept is attributable, at
least in part, to intensifying domestic and global
competition that demands seller initiative and
innovation in satisfying customers (Hair et al.
2009), the empirically validated relationship
between empowerment and job performance
(Liden, Wayne, and Sparrowe 2000), and the
manifest move toward customer oriented selling
and customer relationship management (CRM)
in the twenty-first century (Kotler and Keller
2009, p. 133). Empowerment is a process
whereby an organization, through its
management, provides power to employees
(Sagie and Koslowsky 2000, p. 81).
Notwithstanding its widespread advocacy
(Menon 2001), however, there is scant
agreement on the definition and dimensions of
the concept of empowerment (Melhem 2004, p.
73. According to Menon (2001), there are three
conceptualizations of empowerment. First,
Northern Illinois University
empowerment can be considered an act: the act
of granting power to subordinates. Second, it
can be conceived as a process that involves both
the release of power by managers and the
experiencing of power by subordinates. Third,
it can be considered a psychological state that
manifests itself as cognitions in those being
empowered. In support of the latter two
conceptualizations, Robbins, Crino, and
Fredendall (2002) aver that empowerment is a
cognition-shaping rather than action-changing
process that must occur within the mind-sets of
both managers and salespeople.
Despite the lack of agreement on its precise
definition, empowerment is crucial for
salespeople, given the necessity for them to
provide tailored responses to changing customer
expectations, the urgency to successfully handle
complaints so as to turn initially dissatisfied
customers into satisfied ones, and to help
alleviate the role stress incurred in their
boundary spanning jobs between seller and
buyer organizations (Anderson and Huang
2006). Moreover, with salespeople increasingly
perceived as the ultimate customer relationship
Academic Article
managers (Palmatier et al. 2008), empowerment
can be a valuable tool for sales managers in
motivating salespeople to build and nurture
lasting customer relationships (Yim, Anderson,
and Swaminathan 2004).
To date, the empowerment construct remains
under-researched despite its relevance and
importance to service employees, especially for
major account business-to-business salespeople
(Anderson and Huang 2006). Its understanding
in the sales literature is severely deficient as
scant efforts have been made to rigorously link
sales force empowerment to customer outcomes
such as service quality perception and
satisfaction (Sparks, Bradley, and Callan 1997).
Only limited attempts have been made to look
into the mechanism of how customer
satisfaction or salesperson job satisfaction can
be enhanced via salesperson empowerment, and
a comprehensive conceptual framework
incorporating the antecedents and consequences
of empowerment in a sales setting has yet to be
developed (Menon 2001, p. 154).
In response to the call for a unifying model
capable of integrating the diverse concepts and
relationships that characterize the empowerment
process (Robbins, Crino, and Fredendall 2002),
the present investigation is designed to provide
an integrative conceptual framework to more
thoroughly understand how empowerment can
impact both major account salesperson and
customer outcomes in a sales setting. In
particular, we focus on the construct
“psychological empowerment” for two reasons.
First, the benefits of empowerment will be
actualized only if the salespeople actually
perceive empowerment, i.e., they feel a
psychological state of empowerment (Menon
2001, p. 158). Second, compared with the
traditional managerial understanding and
Fall 2009 29
practices of empowerment, it has received
comparatively little attention as a psychological
construct from the subordinate perspective
(Dee, Henkin, and Duemer 2003, p. 258),
particularly in a sales milieu. Therefore, we
attempt to identify the critical antecedents and
consequences of psychological empowerment
of salespeople. To the best of our knowledge,
this is the first attempt to comprehensively
address the psychological aspects of
empowerment in a sales environment.
Drawing upon literature spanning across the
disciplines of management, marketing,
psychology, and sociology, we propose an
integrated conceptual model depicting the
psychological empowerment of salespeople. In
accordance with the model, a number of
research propositions are offered, followed by a
discussion of their implications for academic
research and improved sales management
practice, including specific recommendations.
E X TA N T
RESEARCH
EMPOWERMENT
ON
The concept of sales force empowerment seems
particularly relevant to sales force management
in this early twenty-first century where customer
relationship selling is of ever-increasing
importance (Kotler and Keller 2009).
Salespeople need greater latitude over their
selling and service activities to innovatively
create superior added value for customers and
thereby build profitable, long-term relationships
with them. Given the extent of salespersoncustomer interaction and negotiation, an
appropriate degree of responsiveness and
flexibility for salespeople is needed to satisfy the
ever changing needs of customers. Today,
salespeople have instant access to information
(e.g., price changes, inventory levels, new
product introductions, promotional campaigns,
Vol. 9, No. 4
30
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
or delivery dates) that used to be provided only
through sales managers.
Yet, most
contemporary salespeople are still dependent on
their sales managers for approval on anything
exceptional that a customer requests in
negotiations, such as special price discounts,
credit for unsatisfactory products, accelerated
delivery or installation dates, or unique service
arrangements. And, most salespeople remain in
the dark as to the profitability of different
prospects or customers because that
information is restricted to sales managers
(Anderson and Huang 2006). Empowerment is
aimed at “turning the front line loose” to use
their knowledge, initiative, and creativity to
promptly and fully satisfy customers in face-toface interactions (Bowen and Lawler 1992, p.
32). Sales force empowerment can provide
major benefits to both the selling firm and its
salespeople by enabling timely “on-the-spot”
responses to customer requests, faster resolution
of customer complaints, and more trusting
interactions with customers (Bowen and Lawler
1992). Overall, salesperson empowerment seems
highly conducive to not only meeting but
exceeding customer expectations (Martin and
Bush 2003) and bringing about long-term
customer satisfaction and loyalty (Chow, Sha,
and Hong 2006).
To date, organizational policies and practices
have largely characterized empowerment from a
macro perspective (Seibert et al. 2004) at the
managerial level. From a managerial perspective,
empowerment has been viewed variously as
participative management (Block 1987), job
involvement (Rafiq and Ahmed 1998), and a
managerial control mechanism (Chebat and
Kollias 2000).
However, when viewed from a micro (Seibert et
al. 2004) or psychological perspective at the
Northern Illinois University
employee level, empowerment has been
conceptualized as a motivational construct (e.g.,
Conger and Kanungo 1988; Spreitzer 1995). In
the present study, we focus on the construct
“psychological empowerment” for two major reasons.
First and foremost, we argue that sales force
empowerment will be effective and beneficial
only if salespeople actually perceive or experience
empowerment, i.e., they sense the psychological
state of empowerment (Menon 2001, p. 158).
Individual salespeople may respond differently
to the same managerial efforts toward
empowerment, and such initiatives will be
efficacious only if salespeople feel personally
empowered and experience an altered emotional
state (Lashley 1998, p. 142). “Creating an
empowered state of mind” (Bowen and Lawler
1995, p. 73) is paramount, thus the importance
of fully understanding the construct
“psychological empowerment” merits incisive
inquiry (Spreitzer 1995).
Second, the majority of research conducted to
date has focused on the managerial perceptions
and practices of empowerment, so relatively few
research efforts have been devoted to
understanding empowerment as a psychological
construct from the perspective of subordinates
(Dee, Henkin, and Duemer 2003, p. 258). This
deficiency in understanding the construct of
“psychological empowerment,” especially in a
sales context, calls for more investigation and
understanding because the potential benefits for
managers, salespeople, and customers may be
substantial.
PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT
Building upon seminal work by Conger and
Kanungo (1988) and Thomas and Velthouse
(1990), empowerment is operationally defined as
a psychological or motivational construct
Fall 2009 31
Academic Article
manifested by a set of four cognitions (task
assessments) reflecting the individual’s
orientation toward his or her job role:
meaningfulness, impact, competence, and
choice. As defined by Thomas and Velthouse
(1990, p. 672), meaningfulness is the individual’s
intrinsic caring about a given task and is
concerned with the value of the task goal judged
in relation to the individual’s own value system.
Impact is understood by the degree to which the
individual perceives that his or her behavior
makes a difference in terms of accomplishing
the task purpose. Competence is the degree to
which a person can perform task activities
skillfully when he or she tries. Choice involves
causal responsibility for a person’s actions.
These four dimensions are considered “the
essential prerequisites for the motivated
individuals to engage in empowered behaviors in
the work environment” (Robbins, Crino, and
Fredendall 2002, p. 422). As a whole, this
approach is predicated on the “perception
aspect” where empowerment is the
“psychological state of a subordinate” resulting
from efforts by his or her supervisor (Lee and
Koh 2001, p. 686) and/or the organizational
empowering structures, policies, and practices
(Seibert, Siler, and Randolph 2004, p. 332). Let's
now turn to the antecedents and consequences
of psychological empowerment of salespeople,
and formulate a series of testable propositions.
C O N C E P T UA L
MODEL
OF
PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT OF
SALESPEOPLE
Figure 1 depicts the antecedents and
consequences of psychological empowerment
of salespeople. Focusing on psychological
empowerment from the subordinate perspective
Figure 1
Conceptual Model of Psychological Empowerment of Salespeople
Consequences
Antecedents
Salesperson
Satisfaction
Work Environment
- Sociopolitical Support
+
+
+
Managerial
- Discretion Empowerment
Job Characteristics
-Task Significance
-Task Identity
-Skill Variety
-Task Autonomy
-Task Feedback
+
+
Psychological
Empowerment
+
+
Customer-Oriented
Selling
+
Customer Satisfaction
Vol. 9, No. 4
32
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
instead of the widely researched managerial
perspective of empowerment emphasizes the
mediating link between empowering acts and
outcomes such as satisfaction for salespeople
and customers (Menon 2001, p. 158).
Underlying this model are individual (cognitive
and affective), behavioral (outcomes and
consequences), and environmental (work setting
characteristics) factors, which in accord with
social cognitive theory (Bandura 1986)
emphasize individual perceptions and
interpretations of behavior and attitudes within
a work environment. To better understand and
analyze the salesperson's feelings of
empowerment, let's examine the antecedents to
psychological empowerment in more detail.
ANTECEDENTS TO PSYCHOLOGICAL
EMPOWERMENT
Drawing upon organizational behavior research,
we explore three sets of factors as important
antecedents to psychological empowerment:
sociopolitical support, discretion empowerment,
and job characteristics (e.g., Kraimer, Seibert,
and Liden 1999; Spreitzer 1996).
Sociopolitical Support Within the Work
Environment
Sociopolitical support is defined as
“endorsement or approval from or legitimacy
granted by organizational constituencies and is
typically gained from membership in
organizational networks” (Spreitzer 1996, p.
488). This support commonly involves an
individual’s boss, subordinates, peers, and
members in his or her work group. Membership
in such support networks facilitates and
enhances social exchange with key
organizational constituencies and thus
engenders a sense of personal acceptance and
power, which may be manifested in augmented
Northern Illinois University
feelings of both self-determination and impact
(Spreitzer 1996). Conversely, Gist and Mitchell
(1992) argue that a lack of support from key
constituencies may thwart feelings of
competence, underscoring the importance of
sociopolitical support in enhancing feelings of
empowerment.
Behaviors are affected by social relations and
embedded in a social structure (Granovetter
1985). Participants in the social structure such
as salespeople spanning the boundary between
the seller and buyer organizations share tacit
information, jointly solve problems (Uzzi 1997),
and acquire knowledge from repeated and
enduring exchange relationships (Inkpen and
Tsang 2005). A supportive social network leads
to increased feelings of competence (Spreitzer
1995) and thus enhanced empowerment. With
sociopolitical support within the work
environment, salespeople are likely to be more
energized and to experience greater
empowerment (Corsun and Enz 1999).
Therefore:
P1. Sociopolitical support enhances
psychological empowerment of the
salesperson.
Managerial Discretion Empowerment.
Conceptualized as the management practice of
giving subordinates “the discretion to make dayto-day decisions about job-related
activities” (Bowen and Lawler 1992; Hartline
and Ferrell 1996), managerial discretion
empowerment provides salespeople greater
latitude in negotiating with prospects and
customers. Kelly (1993, p. 104) stresses that
when employees are truly empowered they
experience greater freedom to exercise their own
discretion during service provision. Allowing
salespeople more discretion in their sales
Academic Article
negotiations and other interactions with
customers would seem to be an essential
prerequisite for boosting feelings of
empowerment for salespeople. Furthermore,
when prospects and customers see that the
salesperson has the power and flexibility to
resolve issues and make concessions without a
time-out to obtain the approval of a manager,
they feel more respect for the salesperson and
more empowered themselves because they are
dealing with someone with decision making
authority. Therefore:
P2. Discretion empowerment enhances
psychological empowerment of the
salesperson.
Job (Task) Characteristics
According to Hackman and Oldman (1976),
there are five core job dimensions germane to
motivation in the realm of job or task
characteristics: skill variety, task identity,
significance, autonomy, and feedback.
As
perceptions of empowerment arise from task
assessments involving meaning, impact,
competence, and self-determination (Thomas
and Velthouse 1990), job characteristics are
considered proximal predictors of psychological
empowerment. While job characteristics are
designed to measure the objective aspects of tasks,
psychological empowerment is reflective of
employees’ emotional responses to their work
(Kraimer, Seibert, and Liden 1999).
If the job task is significant and has a substantial
impact on the lives or work of other people
(Hackman and Oldman 1976), the salesperson’s
perception of meaning is likely to be heightened
and thus his or her feelings of empowerment
are augmented. An autonomous task provides
freedom to the salesperson in scheduling the
work and determining the procedures to be
Fall 2009 33
undertaken (Hackman and Oldman 1976) which
are conducive to the feelings of self-determination
and therefore psychological empowerment.
Furthermore, positive direct and immediate task
feedback from customers and superiors gives the
salesperson clear information concerning his or
her performance effectiveness (Hackman and
Oldman 1976), thereby fostering feelings of
competence (Kraimer, Seibert, and Liden 1999). In
addition, prompt feedback allows cognitive
assessments of impact (Liden, Wayne, and
Sparrowe 2000) because “an individual is
unlikely to be able to exert influence without
knowledge of results” (Kraimer, Seibert, and
Liden 1999, p. 130). The knowledge of results
or feedback is therefore considered an
important precursor to exerting influence or
impact in a sales environment and generating
feelings of empowerment. Prior research
supports the contention that job characteristics
are positively related to psychological
empowerment (e.g., Kraimer, Seibert, and Liden
1999; Liden, Wayne, and Sparrowe 2000). Thus,
we formulate the following proposition:
P3. Job characteristics affect psychological
empowerment of the salesperson.
C O N S E Q U E N C E S
O F
PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT
Specifically, we investigate salesperson job
satisfaction, customer-oriented selling, and
customer satisfaction as impor tant
consequences of psychological empowerment as
suggested in the extant literature (Peccei and
Rosenthal 2001).
Salesperson outcomes—Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction can be defined as “an attitude
stemming from an evaluative process in which
the employee's perceived actual work
Vol. 9, No. 4
34
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
environment is compared to a perceived
standard” (Homburg and Stock 2005, p. 397).
Thus, if salespeople can find meaning in their
jobs (Spreitzer 1995) congruent with and
fulfilling their desired work values, they are more
apt to be satisfied. What's more, if salespeople
feel competent, they are more likely to be
confident and satisfied with their jobs.
Furthermore, salespeople exhibiting higher selfdetermination can more readily attribute success
to themselves, likely leading to greater job
satisfaction. Consequently, we formulate the
following proposition:
P4. Psychological empowerment of a
salesperson enhances his or her job
satisfaction.
Salesperson outcomes—Customer-oriented
selling
Customer-oriented selling has been described as
“the practice of the marketing concept at the
individual salesperson and customer
levels” (Saxe and Weitz 1982, pp. 343-344). In
their seminal work, Saxe and Weitz elaborate on
the characteristics of customer-oriented selling
as exemplified by the desire to help customers
make satisfying purchase decisions by assisting
them in assessing their needs, then accurately
describing offerings that will satisfy those needs
while avoiding manipulative influence tactics and
the use of high pressure.
Customer-oriented selling has been widely
advocated by sales organizations in an effort to
improve customer service and therefore achieve
performance goals (Flaherty, Dahlstrom, and
Skinner 1999). Achieving customer service
excellence and implementing a CRM strategy are
both predicated on salespeople exhibiting a
strong customer-orientation to attain customer
satisfaction (Saxe and Weitz 1982).
The
Northern Illinois University
favorable results of enacting customer-oriented
selling include greater sales force effectiveness
(Baldauf and Cravens 1999) and improved
customer-salesperson relationships (Williams and
Attaway 1996).
By virtue of the favorable outcomes brought
about by selling in a customer-oriented manner,
it is important to identify the critical antecedents
to customer-oriented selling. One of these
antecedents is the salesperson’s psychological
empowerment (Peccei and Rosenthal 2001).
Specifically, psychological empowerment is
associated with flexibility (Thomas and
Velthouse 1990) and the initiation of innovative
actions when problems and opportunities are
encountered (Spreitzer 1995) which constitute
the essence of customer-oriented selling.
Salespeople need the authority to make
independent on-the-spot decisions to flexibly
address dynamic customers’ needs (Knouse and
Strutton 1996), and they also need the power to
initiate creative solutions to proactively satisfy
customers. In essence, a psychologically
empowered salesperson is a procreator (Williams
and Attaway 1996) who feels competent and free
to design a market offering tailor-made to the
idiosyncratic needs of the customer.
Psychologically empowered salespeople who
perceive that they are able to make significant
impact on their jobs are more confident, and such
perceptions can drive them to expend more
customer-oriented efforts to better satisfy
customers (Thomas and Velthouse 1990). Feeling
competent at work means that salespeople can
mobilize their skills and resources effectively to
achieve task goals (Gist and Mitchell 1992) which
translates into offering innovative solutions that
more fully satisfy customer needs (Saxe and
Weitz 1982). Additionally, perceiving choice or
self-determination (Spreitzer 1995) when
Academic Article
interacting with customers is a prerequisite for
responding flexibly to dynamic customer needs
and underlies the practice of customer-oriented
selling. Therefore, we posit:
P5. Psychological empowerment of the
salesperson promotes customer-oriented
selling.
According to social exchange theory (Blau
1964), salespeople who derive satisfaction from
their jobs will reciprocate with behaviors
supporting those they serve and from whom
they benefit (i.e., customers). In other words,
highly satisfied salespeople are likely to engage
in more customer-oriented selling behaviors in a
bid to further maintain and enhance these
mutually beneficial relationships.
Thus,
consistent with the literature, we hypothesize:
P6. Job satisfaction experienced by the
salesperson enhances customer-oriented
selling.
Customer outcome—Customer satisfaction
Customer satisfaction is defined as the degree
of fulfillment of some need, desire, goal, or
other plausible end state in a given exchange
encounter between the customer and the
salesperson (Oliver 1999). A psychologically
empowered salesperson, who is energized,
competent, and exhibits self-determination
(Spreitzer 1995), is more likely to deliver
product and service fulfillment from which
customer satisfaction can be derived.
Additionally, customers are likely to be more
satisfied when they perceive that salespeople are
empowered and willing to take responsive and
competent action to promptly address their
needs and handle their problems (Spinelli and
Canavos 2000). When salespeople and
customers are “physically, organizationally, and
psychologically close” (Schneider and Bowen
Fall 2009 35
1985, p. 431), psychological empowerment of
the salesperson should augment customer
satisfaction by contributing to customer
perceptions of their own control, self-worth,
and competence (Sparks et al. 1997). As such:
P7. Psychological empowerment of the
salesperson enhances customer
satisfaction.
In line with our foregoing discussion, a logical
assumption is that customer-oriented selling
behaviors will enhance the customer's
satisfaction level in the sales encounter. It
follows that customers will be more satisfied by
customer-oriented salespeople who exhibit
genuine caring for their needs and who will take
the initiatives to fully meet those needs in timely
fashion. Therefore, we presume:
P8. The salesperson’s customer-oriented selling
behaviors enhance customer satisfaction.
C O N T R I BU T I O N S
IMPLICATIONS
A N D
Marketing scholars commonly embrace
empowerment as giving more discretion to
subordinates to make day-to-day decisions in
their jobs (Hartline and Ferrell 1996). No known
research, however, has been undertaken
heretofore to shed light on the specific
dimensions for psychological empowerment of
salespeople. In light of the dearth of research
on psychological empowerment in a sales
setting, the present study offers an integrative
model to better understand the perceptions of
empowerment by salespeople, and indicates how
psychological empowerment may benefit selling
firms in promoting customer-oriented selling
behaviors, as well as in developing both
salesperson and customer satisfaction. By
focusing on the perceptional aspect of
empowerment and looking into the concept of
Vol. 9, No. 4
36
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
psychological empowerment within a sales
setting, we also respond to the call from Williams
and Plouffe (2007) who point out that sales
research in the area of motivation has grown
very incrementally due to a lack of new applied
constructs. In this investigation, we draw from
research across several social sciences to apply
the concepts of psychological empowerment to
the sales domain. Our findings and propositions
offer significant implications for both academic
research and sales management practice.
IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH
First and foremost, we recommend research be
conducted to empirically test and validate the
theoretical framework provided herein. We
conceptualize empowerment as a process, in
accord with Conger and Kanungo (1988) and
Robbins, Crino, and Fredendall 2002), and this
calls for a longitudinal research design to test the
tenability of our proposed model.
Though we have identified what we believe are
the most crucial links in the empowerment
process as portrayed in our model, we realize
that there may be other constructs and/or
relationships that call for further research
endeavors. For instance, leadership styles may
possibly influence the perceptions of
empowerment (Avolio et al. 2004). Furthermore,
as psychologically empowered salespeople are
more motivated to nurture customer loyalty,
customer retention might also be an outcome
variable in the model. Given the foregoing
conjectures, we believe our inquiry significantly
enhances knowledge on the nomological
network of psychological empowerment in a
sales setting, and sets forth appropriate testable
hypotheses.
Implication for Sales Management Practice
Based on our analysis of the empowerment
Northern Illinois University
literature, development of an integrated
conceptual framework, and setting forth eight
research propositions for the psychological
empowerment of salespeople, we feel confident
that sales managers who psychologically empower
their sales force are likely to see substantial
benefits in terms of customer-oriented selling,
and increased satisfaction for both their
salespeople and customers. As set forth in our
conceptual framework, there are three
antecedents to successful salesperson
empowerment: (1) sociopolitical support in the
sales work environment, (2) discretionary
empowerment from sales management, and (3)
provision of essential job task characteristics. In
carrying out the psychological empowerment of
their salespeople, sales managers need to
understand and follow several guidelines which
may require a dramatic change of attitude.
Sales Management Guidelines
Giving salespeople the flexibility to make
decisions about job-related activities or discretion
empowerment (Bowen and Lawler 1992) is a
necessary but not sufficient condition for
salespeople to fully engage in empowered
behaviors in the sales environment (Robbins,
Crino, and Fredendall 2002). Sales managers,
need to understand that empowerment is not
simply granting salespeople increased leeway to
make more day-to-day decisions. Empowerment
means going beyond mere delegation to enabling
salespeople by conveying trust and confidence in
their ability and willingness to do a first-rate job
f o r c u st o m e r s a nd t h e c o m p a ny.
Understandably, empowerment may pose risks
for sales managers and their salespeople. Some
sales managers may be reluctant to give up
control over results for which they are likely to
be held accountable, thus they convey their lack
of trust in subordinates. From the perspective
Academic Article
of salespeople, some may be fearful of making
decision mistakes for which they will be
reprimanded, so they hide behind bureaucratic
procedures and develop decision paralysis when
facing unanticipated customer requests. To
overcome these fears, a bond of trust must be
established between sales managers and their
salespeople. Mutual trust is a shared belief that
you can rely on each other in working toward
organizational goals. Sales manager must be
willing to become vulnerable to the decisions
and actions of their salespeople and manifest
confidence that they will perform as expected
without being monitored or controlled. Unless
sales managers can let go and trust their
salespeople, they will not be able to fully
empower them and optimize the achievement of
desirable outcomes.
Because empowerment will be fruitful only if the
salespeople actually perceive or psychologically
experience empowerment (Menon 2001), sales
managers need to provide and champion
sociopolitical support networks (Spreitzer 1996)
conducive to providing salespeople with feelings
of confidence and support from the entire
organization: superiors, peers, and subordinates
in serving customers. Sales managers should
proactively identify and remove conditions in the
organizational structure, policies, and procedures
that foster feelings of frustration or
powerlessness among salespeople. In addition,
salespeople need to be encouraged and rewarded
for exercising initiative and creativity in satisfying
customers. Sales managers can further empower
salespeople by confidently sharing information,
such as profitability by market segments
(products, customers, territories), to help them
understand and contribute to organizational
goals. Regardless of leadership style, every sales
manager needs to show concern for the
emotional needs and feelings of salespeople by
Fall 2009 37
striving to enhance their sense of personal worth
and thus feelings of independence in making
decisions on behalf of the organization and its
customers (Spreitzer 1996). This requires sales
managers to release their authority sufficiently to
allow salespeople to make occasional mistakes
without fear of reprimand. In addition, sales
managers should try to enrich the sales tasks
(Hackman and Oldman 1976) of their
salespeople so that they will enjoy positive
feelings about the importance of their jobs to
the organization and to customers, that they
experience the freedom and autonomy to
creatively handle special customer requests, and
that they anticipate praise or rewards for
exercising initiative and creativity in striving to
satisfy customers. Sales jobs designed to be
significant and meaningful to the salespeople,
along with consistent constructive performance
feedback from sales managers, can provide
salespeople with enhanced feelings of
empowerment. Moreover, salespeople who
experience creative flexibility and personal
control over decision-making in negotiating with
customers are more likely to develop a positive
attitude toward satisfying customers and greater
commitment to organizational values (Schneider,
White, and Paul 1998). Whereas, salespeople
who feel relatively powerless may compensate
for such negative feelings by attempting to
dominate relationships with customers by
behaving more bureaucratically and less
responsively to customer requests, thereby
resulting in lower customer satisfaction (Yagil
2001).
In order for salespeople to feel
empowered, sales managers need to release
traditional power and prerogatives and manifest
trust in their salespeople, demonstrate their
commitment to CRM, eliminate organizational
barriers to empowering salespeople and
customers, nurture a customer-oriented culture
Vol. 9, No. 4
38
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
and supportive working environment for
salespeople, and provide frequent empowerment
training along with suitable reward systems to
promote desirable CRM behaviors.
CONCLUSION
In the intensely competitive markets of the
twenty-first century, sales force empowerment
will become increasingly important in academic
research and business practice (Seibert et al.
2004). As a managerial tool (Chebat and Kollias
2000) aimed at “turning the front line
loose” (Bowen and Lawler 1992, p. 32),
empowerment has profound application to the
sales domain (Martin and Bush 2003) where
boundary-spanning salespeople need flexibility
and discretionary freedom to properly and
promptly address the changing needs of
customers (Hair et al. 2009). Psychological
empowerment can be an effective motivating
force for salespeople with substantial favorable
outcomes such as increased customer-oriented
selling behaviors, enhanced salesperson job
satisfaction, and improved customer satisfaction.
Sales managers are strongly urged to recognize
and focus on the crucial role of psychological
empowerment in order to more effectively
motivate their salespeople to better serve
customers in the increasingly competitive and
global environment of the twenty-first century.
Salespeople, as the ultimate “relationship
managers,” must continuously learn about their
customers and adapt to their changing needs and
wants in order to nurture long-term, mutually
beneficially customer relationships (Turley and
Geiger 2006). Aided by inexorable advances in
telecommunication technologies, salespeople are
becoming increasingly independent of their sales
managers and better equipped to carry out their
duties of forging long-term customer
relationships while becoming more selfNorthern Illinois University
managed, self-directed, and self-motivated
(Kotler and Keller, 2009; Jones et al. 2005;
Anderson 1996). Driven by the forces of
technology to become more self-managed,
salespeople also need to be psychologically
empowered to fulfill their expanding CRM roles
in front-line interactions with customers.
Psychological empowerment for salespeople,
therefore, is not only recommended but virtually
essential in this era of relationship selling.
Psychologically empowering salespeople also provides
the added benefits of increasing their job
satisfaction as they become more confident,
able, and willing to fully satisfy customers and
develop long-run relationships. Overall,
psychological empowerment of salespeople can
be an impressive win-win for all: sales managers,
salespeople, and customers.
Rolph E. Anderson (Ph.D., University of
Florida), Royal H. Gibson, Sr. Professor of
Marketing, LeBow College of Business, Drexel
University . Email: andersre@drexel.edu
Srinivasan Swaminathan, (Ph.D., University of
Texas), Professor of Marketing, LeBow College
of Business, Drexel University
Email: swaminas@drexel.edu)
Frederick Hong-kit Yim, (Ph.D., Drexel
University), Assistant Professor of Marketing,
School of Business, Hong Kong Baptist
University
Email: fred.yim@gmail.com)
Academic Article
Fall 2009 39
REFERENCES
Chebat, J. and Kollias, P. (2000). The impact of
empowerment on customer contact
employees’ role in service organizations.
Journal of Service Research, 3 (1), 66-81.
Anderson, R.E. (1996). Personal selling and sales
management in the new millennium. Journal
of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 16 (4),
17-32.
_____ and Huang, W. (2006). Empowering
Salespeople: Personal, Managerial, and
Organizational Perspectives. Psychology &
Marketing, 23 (2), 139-159.
Avolio, B.J., Zhu, W., Koh, W. and Bhatia, P.
(2004). Transformational leadership and
organizational commitment: mediating role
of psychological empowerment and
moderating role of structural distance.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25 (8), 951968.
Baldauf, A. and Cravens. D.W. (1999). Improving
the effectiveness of field sale organizations:
a European perspective. Industrial Marketing
Management, 28 (1), 63-72.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundation of thought and
action: a social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Birdi, K., Clegg, C., Patterson, M., Robinson, A.,
Stride, C.B., Wall, T.D. and Wood, S.J. (2008).
The impact of human resources and
operational management practice on
company productivity: a longitudinal study.
Personnel Psychology, 61 (3), 467-501.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life.
Wiley: New York, NY.
Block, P. (1987). The Empowered Manager. JosseyBass: San Francisco.
Bowen, D.E. and Lawler, E.E. (1992). The
empowerment of service workers: what,
why, how, and when. Sloan Management
Review, 33 (3), 31-39.
_____ and _____ (1995). Empowering service
employees. Sloan Management Review, 36 (4),
73-84.
Chow, I.H., Lo, T., Sha, Z. and Hong, J. (2006).
The impact of developmental experience,
empowerment, and organizational support
on catering service staff performance.
International Journal of Hospitality Management,
25 (3), 478-495.
Conger, J.A. and Kanungo, R.N. (1988). The
empowerment process: integrating theory
and practice. Academy of Management Review,
13 (3), 471-482.
Corsun, D.L. and Enz, C.A. (1999). Predicting
psychological empowerment among service
workers: the effect of support-based
relationships. Human Relations, 52 ( 2), 205224
Dee, J.R., Henkin, A.B. and Duemer, L. (2003).
Structural antecedents and psychological
correlates of teacher empowerment. Journal
of Educational Administration, 41 (3), 257-277.
Flaherty, T.B., Dahlstrom, R., and Skinner, S.J.,
(1999). Organizational values and role stress
as determinants of customer-oriented selling.
Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management,
19 (2), 1-18.
Gist, M.E. and Mitchell, T.R. (1992). Selfefficacy: a theoretical analysis of
determinants and malleability. Academy of
Management Review, 17 (2), 183-211.
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and
social structure: the problem of
Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology,
91 (3), 481-510.
Hackman, J.R. and Oldman, G.R. (1976).
Motivation through the design of work: test
of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 16 (2), 250-279.
Vol. 9, No. 4
40
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Mehta, R. and
Babbin, B. (2009). Sales Management: Building
Customer Relationships and Partnerships.
Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
Lashley, C. (1998). Feeling empowered for
service excellence. International Journal of
Customer Relationship Management, 1 (2), 141151.
Hartline, M.D. and Ferrell, O.C. (1996). The
management of customer-contact service
employees: an empirical investigation. Journal
of Marketing, 60 (4), 52-70.
Lee, M. and Koh, J. (2001). Is empowerment
really a new concept? International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 12 (4), 684-695.
Homburg, C. and Stock, R.M. (2005). Exploring
the conditions under which salesperson
work satisfaction can lead to customer
satisfaction. Psychology and Marketing, 22 (5),
393-420.
Inkpen, A.C. and Tsang, E.W.K. (2005). Social
capital, network, and knowledge transfer.
Academy of Management Review, 30 (1), 146165.
Jones, E., Brown, S.P., Zoltners, A.A. and
Weitz, B.A. (2005). The changing
environment of selling and sales
management. Journal of Personal Selling and
Sales Management, 25 (2), 105-111.
Kelley, S.W. (1993). Discretion and the service
employee. Journal of Retailing, 69 (1), 1 0 4 126.
Knouse, S.B. and Strutton, D. (1996). Molding a
total quality sales force through managing
empowerment, evaluation, and reward and
recognition processes. Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, 4 (3), 24-35.
Kotler, P. and Keller, K.L (2009). Marketing
management, 13th ed. Pearson, Upper S a d d l e
River, N.J.
Kraimer, M.L., Seibert, S.E. and Liden, R.C.
(1999). Psychological empowerment as a
multidimensional construct: a test of
construct validity. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 59 (1), 127-142.
Northern Illinois University
Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J. and Sparrowe, R.T.
(2000). An examination of the mediating
role of psychological empowerment on the
relations between the job, interpersonal
relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 85 (3), 407-416.
Martin, C.A. and Bush, A.J. (2003). The
potential influence of organizational and
personal variables on customer-oriented
selling. Journal of Business & Industrial
Marketing, 18 (2), 114-132.
Melhem, Y. (2004). The antecedents of customer
-contact employees’ empowerment. Employee
Relations, 26 (1/2), 72-93.
Menon, S.T. (2001). Employee empowerment:
an integrative psychological approach.
Applied Psychology: An international Review, 50
(1), 153-180.
Oliver, R.L. (1999). Whence customer loyalty?”
Journal of Marketing, 63 (October), 33-44.
Palmatier, R.W., Scheer, L.K., Evans, K.R., and
Arnold, T.J. (2008). Achieving relationship
marketing effectiveness in business-tobusiness exchanges. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 36 (2), 174-190.
Peccei, R. and Rosenthal, P. (2001). Delivering
customer-oriented behavior through
empowerment: an empirical test of HRM
assumptions. Journal of Management Studies, 38
(6), 831-857.
Academic Article
Rafiq, M. and Ahmed, P.K. (1998). A customeroriented framework for empowering service
employees. Journal of Services Marketing, 12
(5), 379-396.
Robbins, T.L., Crino, M.D. and Fredendall, L.D.
(2002). An integrative model of the
empowerment process. Human Resource
Management Review, 12 (3), 419-443.
Fall 2009 41
Spinelli, M.A. and Canavos, G.C. (2000). The
relationship between employee satisfaction
and guest satisfaction. Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 41 (6), 2933.
Spreitzer, G.M. (1995). Psychological
empowerment in the workplace:
dimensions, measurement, and validation.
Academy of Management Journal, 38 (5), 142-65.
Sagie, A. and Koslowsky, M. (2000). Participation
and Empowerment in Organizations: Modeling,
Effectiveness, and Applications, California: Sage
Publications.
_____ (1996). Social structural characteristics
of psychological empowerment. Academy of
Management Journal, 39 (2), 483-504.
Saxe, R. and Weitz, B.A. (1982). The SOCO
scale: A measure of the customer
orientation of salespeople.
Journal of
Marketing Research, 19 (3), 343-351.
Thomas, K.W. and Velthouse, B.A. (1990).
Cognitive elements of empowerment.
Academy of Management Review, 15 (4), 666681.
Schneider, B, White, S.S. and Paul, M.C. (1998).
Linking service climate and customer
perceptions of service quality: Test of a
causal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83,
150-163.
Turley, D. and Geiger, S. (2006). Exploring
salesperson learning in the client
relationship nexus. European Journal of
Marketing, 40 (5/6), 662-681.
_____ and Bowen, D.E. (1985). Employee and
customer perceptions of service in banks:
replication and extension. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 70 (3), 423-433.
Seibert, S.E., Siler, S.R., and Randolph, W.A.
(2004). Taking empowerment to the next
level: a multiple-level model of
empowerment, performance, and
satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal,
47 (3), 332-349.
Sparks, B.A., Bradley, G.L. and Callan, V.J.
(1997). The impact of staff empowerment
and communication style on customer
valuations: the special case of service failure.
Psychology and Marketing, 14 (5), 475-493.
Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition
in interfirm networks: the paradox of
Embeddedness.
Administrative Science
Quarterly, 42 (1), 35–67.
Williams, B.C. and Plouffe, C.R. (2007).
Assessing the evolution of sales knowledge:
a 20-year content analysis. Industrial
Marketing Management, 36 (4), 408-419.
Williams, M.R. and Attaway, J.S. (1996).
Exploring salesperson's customer
orientation as a mediator of organizational
culture's influence on buyer-seller
relationships. Journal of Personal Selling and
Sales Management, 16 (4), 33-52.
Yagil, D. (2001). Ingratiation and assertiveness in
the service provider-customer dyad. J o u r n a l
of Service Research, 3, 345-353.
Vol. 9, No. 4
42
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Yim, F. H., Anderson, R.E. and Swaminathan, S.
(2004). Customer relationship management:
its dimensions and impact on customer
outcomes. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales
Management, 24 (4), 265-280.
Northern Illinois University
Fall 2009 43
Academic Article
Does the Quality of Consulting Related Behaviors
Mediate the relationship Between those Behaviors and
salesperson Effectiveness?
By Alfred M. Pelham and Louis Tucci
This study sought to develop a model of performance including well documented salesperson behaviors
(adaptive selling and customer orientation) as well as little studied salesperson behaviors (listening and
sales consulting) to measure the relative impact of these behaviors. The study also sought to determine
if the quality of those behaviors, measured by the extent of value-added for customers, mediated the
relationships between behaviors and performance variables (customer retention and quota percentile).
The results also suggest that the extent of value added for the customer, fully mediates four of six possible behavior-performance relationships. An examination of direct and indirect effects reveals that sales
consulting behavior has the largest effect on customer retention, while active listening behavior has the
largest effect on quota percentile. The authors discuss explanations for, and the implications of, these
results.
INTRODUCTION
Growing recognition of the importance of
customer retention has influenced modification
of sales management programs to encourage
sales force consulting in order to create value for
the customer and not merely communicate it.
Baber (1997) suggests that the objective of a
sales consultant is to “to develop industry,
customer, and/or technical knowledge, become
an expert in some area of value to the customer,
and then look for and solve customer wants,
needs, problems, and opportunities related to
that knowledge and expertise” (p. 162).
Effective sales consulting activities lead to lower
customer operating costs in the use of the
product for the customer and/or lower supply
chain costs.
Pelham’s studies (2002a, 2002b, 2006),
documented links between consulting-oriented
sales management programs and firm sales
growth and profit. However the models
documented in those studies were at the firm
level, not the at salesperson level, and did not
study the impact of multiple consulting related
salesperson behaviors on performance
outcomes more under the control of
salespeople.
This study seeks to investigate whether multiple
consulting behaviors directly impact
performance outcomes, such as customer
retention and quota percentile, or indirectly
impact those outcomes, through the quality of
those behaviors. At the salesperson level, Plank
and Reid (1994) suggest an expansion of the
Walker, Churchill, and Ford (1979) model of the
antecedents and consequences of salesperson’s
behaviors. Plank and Reid suggest that the
immediate outcome of a salesperson selling
interaction (e.g. persuading purchase to decision
makers) or a non-selling interaction behavior
(e.g. a contact with non-decision makers to
service an existing account) is behavioral quality.
Plank and Reid also suggest that most
salesperson research is in the context of the
selling interaction with buyers, neglecting the
impact of salesperson behaviors outside of the
selling interaction, such as interactions with
Vol. 9, No. 4
44
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
users. For example, studies of adaptive selling
(Spiro and Weitz, 1990), customer orientation
(Saxe and Weitz, 1982), and active salesperson
listening (Castleberry and Shepherd, 1993) have
been in the context of the selling interaction.
Those studies (see Franke and Park’s 2006 metaanalysis) document positive bi-variate
relationships between adaptive selling, customer
orientation, listening, and salesperson
effectiveness outcomes such as achievement of
quota. However, as suggested by Plank and Reid
(1994) salespeople’s effectiveness are also
dependent on the quality of interactions with
buyer personnel other than decision makers
such as information gathering from users or
technical employees or exploring solutions to
customer problems. There have been no studies
of adaptive selling or customer orientation in
this context of salesperson consulting. In
addition, there has been no study of
comprehensive relationships between adaptive
selling, customer orientation, listening, and
consulting behaviors and the outcomes of those
behaviors.
consulting behaviors, and the whether that
quality mediates the relationships between
behaviors and appropriate effectiveness
measures. One measure of salesperson
behavioral quality would be based upon
Pelham’s (2002b) construct of consulting
effectiveness, the extent of value added to the
product/service from sales-force suggestions to
buyer to reduce costs. Therefore the purposes
of this study are to :1)determine the relationship
between salesperson adaptive selling, listening,
customer orientation and salesperson
consulting behaviors, 2) measure the quality of
those behaviors in terms of
consulting
effectiveness, and 3) test Plank and Reid’s (1994)
model by determining if consulting effectiveness
mediates the relationships between salesperson
behaviors and quota performance and customer
retention.
HYPOTHESIZED RELATIONSHIPS
Salesperson Consulting
Plank and Reid (1994) indicate that salespeople
are only partially responsible for effectiveness
outcomes such as profit and sales growth. At
the salesperson level and the firm level, sales
growth and profit are affected by the actions
and decisions of other functions. The
implication of their suggestions is that sales
managers should consider more emphasis in
evaluation and reward programs on behavioral
quality to complement traditional output
oriented evaluation and rewards. They suggest
that the quality of behaviors mediate the
relationships between behaviors and salesperson
effectiveness (e.g. sales versus quota).
Salesperson consulting behaviors provides a
crucial conduit for customer need information
to the technical and marketing personnel of the
selling firm. Pelham’s (2006) results suggest that
successful firms involve customers early in the
product development effort, resulting in
enhanced performance for the buyer and the
seller. The salesperson's ability to develop a
deep understanding of customer goals and
problems, as well as the ability to develop
potential solutions allows the selling firm to be
more innovative and increases the potential for
successful product modifications. To be an
effective consultant it would be expected that
the salesperson would practice adaptive,
customer oriented, and listening behaviors.
This study sought to test their model by
measuring the quality of salesperson customer
orientation, adaptive selling, listening, and
Salesperson consultants would tend to spend a
higher percentage of their time, compared to
other salespeople, seeking to solve my
Northern Illinois University
Fall 2009 45
Academic Article
customers' problems, compared to the time
making sales presentations. Salesperson
consultants would also tend to spend more time,
relative to other salespeople, listening to users of
the product than the time spent in the buyer's
office making presentations. Salesperson
consultants would spend more time consulting,
compared to other salespeople, with current
clients seeking to lower their costs, at the
expense of time spent developing new accounts.
Adaptive Selling
Adaptive salespeople (Spiro and Weitz, 1990)
have a greater tendency, compared to nonadaptive salespeople to experiment with
different sales approaches, to be flexible in the
selling approach used, and to use a wide range
of selling approaches. Because of these
tendencies, adaptive salespeople have the ability
to gather appropriate customer information,
correctly process that information, and correctly
adapt and adjust their interactions to the unique
nature of the situation. Thus, they are more
likely to perform better than salespeople who
are less able to adapt their interactions (Spiro
and Weitz, 1990). Adaptive salespeople adjust
messages in response to customer reaction,
which is related to customer oriented behaviors
and listening behaviors designed to uncover the
needs of customers in order to satisfy those
needs. Franke and Park (2006) argue that
adapting to customers entails focusing on their
individual needs and preferences, which should
lead to a customer-centered, problem-solving
orientation (customer orientation) Their results
suggest that the direction of influence goes from
adaptive selling (e.g. flexibility and trying to
understand how one customer differs from
another) to customer orientation (trying to find
out which products would be most helpful,
taking a problem solving approach, and having
the customers’ best interests in mind).
Customer Orientation
Customer oriented salespeople (Saxe and Weitz
1982) try to figure out a customer's needs, have
the customer's best interests in mind, and take a
problem solving approach in selling products or
services to customers. Customer-oriented
behaviors include recommending products that
are best suited to solving customer problems.
Interpersonal Listening in Personal Selling
Salespeople are competent listeners if they ask
appropriate questions, uncover the customer’s
problems/needs, and seek appropriate feedback
throughout the interaction (Castleberry et al.,
1999). Ramsey and Sohi (1997) argue that
successful implementation of a customer
orientation requires that salespeople have the
necessary listening skills to effectively gather
information about the customer.
Castleberry et al., (1999) tested a scale to
measure Interpersonal Listening in the Personal
Selling Environment (ILPS). The items seek to
measure the extent of active listening behaviors
such as avoiding interrupting customers, using a
lot of probing questions and continuing
q u e s ti o ns , a nd re ad i ng n o n-v e r bal
communication. They found that this construct
was associated with higher quality of sales
presentations as well as output measures such as
closing sales, dollar volume of sales, and
converting prospects into customers.
Functional Integration Theory
Functional integration theory (Griffin and
Hauser, 1992) suggests that the marketing/R&D
interface is critical because it integrates
knowledge about market needs with knowledge
about how to create a product to meet those
needs. Thus, successful salesperson consulting is
Vol. 9, No. 4
46
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
critical in the ability to deliver value added
products to customers. In this study salesperson
consulting is defined as time spent by
salespeople seeking to solve customers' problems
as well as time consulting with current clients to
lower their costs. Franke and Parke (1996) found
a causal relationship between adaptive selling. In
the model that will be tested in this study, we will
expect relationships between all salesperson
behaviors, but limit causal links to those between
consulting related behaviors, behavioral quality,
and salesperson effectiveness (customer
retention and quota percentile).
SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY AND
RELATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS
THEORIES
Social exchange theory (Heider, 1958) and
relational communications theory (Alloy and
Tabachnik, 1984) provide further support for the
supposition that a salesperson’s consulting and
related behaviors should be positively related to
consulting effectiveness and its outcomes. These
theories are based upon the thinking process
about the expected behaviors of the other party
within the contexts of social norms in their roles
and relationships. Personnel in the buying firm
may expect typical salespeople to push and
manipulate to sell their products, with little
regard or understanding of the needs or
problems of that firm. Salesperson consulting
behaviors signal buying firm personnel that the
salesperson intends to understand the firm’s
goals, needs, and problems. These behaviors
signal buyers of the salesperson’s desire to
collaborate in seeking solutions to problems and
indicate problem-solving competence. This
results in buying firm personnel being more
willing to cooperate with the sales consultant in
the process to seek solutions to the buying firm’s
problems, leading to a greater ability to uncover
and solve customer problems. As problems are
Northern Illinois University
uncovered and solved to the satisfaction of
customers there is likely to be an increase in the
salesperson’s sales and improvement in that
salesperson’s customer retention.
Sales
consulting behaviors which result in reduced
customer costs should lead customers to value
the relationship with the seller, lead to longer
relationships, and, thus, higher level of sales.
Based upon the Plank and Reid (1994) model,
the influence of consulting behaviors on
customer retention or quota percentile sales may
be mediated by the quality of those behaviors.
However, based upon the Walker, Churchill, and
Ford (1979) model and the theories discussed
above we present the following hypotheses:
H1: There is a positive relationship between
Sales Consulting (SALCONS) and
Consulting Effectiveness (CONSEFF).
H2: There is a positive relationship between
Sales Consulting (SALCONS) and customer
retention.
H3: There is a positive relationship between
Sales Consulting (SALCONS) and percent of
quota.
In this study additional measures of Sales
Consulting and Consulting Effectiveness will be
tested for reliability and validity to provide a
more comprehensive view of those constructs,
compared to the more limited measures in
Pelham’s (2002b and 2006) studies. In this study
measures of constructs will be based on those
previously found to be reliable and valid by other
researchers. The methods section the results of
further validation to eliminate items that load on
multiple constructs.
Various studies, at the firm level, discuss the
benefits of enhancing product value for
customers, including reduced customer costs,
customer satisfaction, customer retention, sales
growth, and profitability (Wisner, 2001).
Academic Article
Customers are likely to be more loyal to vendors
who provide continuous product value
improvements and who provide consulting
suggestions that decrease operational costs.
Pelham (2002b; 2006) discussed why sales-force
efforts to reduce customer costs should also
result in customer satisfaction/retention, leading
to selling firm growth and profitability. For the
same reasons, at the salesperson level, there
should be a positive relationship between
salesperson consulting effectiveness and
measures of salesperson effectiveness.
When a salesperson’s consulting efforts add
value to the product/service by reducing costs or
enhancing customer revenue, customer
satisfaction should increase and the customer
should desire to continue their relationship.
Salespeople who are effective in their consulting
effort should have higher levels of customer
retention and sales performance, compared to
salespeople who have lower levels of consulting
effectiveness. Thus:
H4: There is a positive relationship between
salesperson Consulting Effectiveness
(CONSEFF) and salesperson customer
retention
H5: There is a positive relationship between
salesperson Consulting Effectiveness
(CONSEFF) and salesperson percentile of
quota achievement.
It is possible that adaptive selling, customer
orientation, and active listening could have direct
influences on consulting effectiveness, and not
just indirect influences through consulting
behaviors. Salespeople who practice adaptive
selling modify sales presentations across and
during customer interactions in response to the
perceived nature of the sales situation (Spiro and
Weitz, 1990). This could result in a more
cooperative, rather than adversarial, relationship
with customer personnel, leading to a more
Fall 2009 47
conducive context for effective problem solving.
A number of studies (e.g. Spiro et al., 1990;
Johlke, 2006) have provided the theoretical
justification for expectation of a positive
relationship between adaptive selling and various
measures of salesperson effectiveness, such as
sales growth. Those studies and others (see
Franke and Park, 2006) have documented the
significance of those relationships. It is possible,
however, that in a model with other related
salesperson behaviors, that the relationship
between adaptive selling and measures of
salesperson effectiveness may be indirect. Also,
based on the Plank and Reid (1994) model, it
may be possible that the relationship between
adaptive selling and salesperson effectiveness
may be indirect through the quality of adaptive
selling behaviors. But, consistent with the
theories discussed above, previous empirical
evidence, and the Walker, Churchill, and Ford
(1979) model we present the following
hypotheses:
H6: There is a positive relationship between
Adaptive Selling and Consulting
Effectiveness (CONSEFF).
Franke and Park (2006) summarize studies
documenting links between adaptive selling
behaviors and customer orientation (Saxe and
Weitz, 1982). Franke and Park’s argue that the
adaptive salesperson would tend to take a
problem-solving orientation. In a similar fashion,
adaptive selling behaviors, designed to modify
interactions with customers based on the unique
nature of the situation, should be positively
related to consulting behaviors that implement a
salesperson’s customer oriented motivation to
figure out a customer’s needs and are consistent
with the salesperson’s motivation to keep the
customer’s best interests in mind. Thus:
Vol. 9, No. 4
48
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
H7: There is a positive relationship between
Adaptive Selling and Salesperson Consulting
(SALCONS).
H9: There is a positive relationship between
Customer Orientation and Salesperson
Consulting (SALCONS).
As indicated above, Ramsey and Sohi (1997)
argue that salespeople listening skills are
necessary to successfully implement the
motivational component of customer
orientation. If salespeople cannot ask appropriate
questions they cannot uncover the explicit and
implicit customer’s problems/needs and
therefore would be unlikely to engage in
consulting behaviors. Wotruba (1996) argues that
in order to create value for a customer, the
salesperson must sense and diagnose customer
needs and problems, which require listening
behaviors. These listening behaviors should be
necessary elements of salesperson consulting
efforts to diagnose and solve customer
problems. The salesperson must effectively listen
to understand, not only the symptoms of those
problems, but uncover the important causes of
the problems before solutions are explored with
the customer. Thus:
Since active listening or ILPS creates the
impression that the salesperson sincerely cares
about what the customer’s employees are saying
this should lead to stronger relationships with
those employees. The stronger relationships
enable more productive exploration of customer
needs and a more appropriate match between
those needs and the seller’s products and
services. Consistent with the theories discussed
above we suggest that:
H8: There is a positive relationship between
Interpersonal Listening in Personal Selling
and Salesperson Consulting (SALCONS).
Salesperson customer orientation requires
salespeople to be motivated to understand
customer needs, to be motivated by the
customers' interests, and to recommend products
that are best suited to solving customer
problems. Therefore, it is necessary that the
customer-oriented salesperson perform
diagnostic and problem solving behaviors
associated with salesperson consulting. It would
be expected that salesperson customer orientated
motivation and behaviors would lead to
behaviors designed to uncover and solve
customer problems. Thus:
Northern Illinois University
H10: There is a positive relationship between
Interpersonal Listening in Personal Selling
(ILPS) and Consulting Effectiveness.
Social exchange theory (Heider, 1958) and
relational communications theory (Alloy and
Tabachnik, 1984), in a selling situation, would
lead to the expectation that the customeroriented behaviors of salespeople provide
informational cues to buyers as to the
salespersons’ intentions to solve customers'
problems, leading to a consultative and
reciprocal dialogue. This expectation is
reinforced by the finding by Saxe and Weitz
(1982) of a positive association between
salesperson customer orientation and buyer
cooperation, as well as repeat purchase, trust,
and lack of conflict. Thus:
H11: There is a positive relationship between
Customer Orientation (CO) and Consulting
Effectiveness.
Franke and Park’s meta-analysis (2006)
summarize the theoretical justification for
expectation of relationships between adaptive
selling, as well as customer orientation, and
salesperson effectiveness. They found a
significant relationship between ADAPTS and
effectiveness measures. That meta-analysis
Academic Article
Fall 2009 49
discusses studies providing empirical evidence
supporting those expectations and evidence of
relationships between those adaptive selling and
effectiveness measures such as sales versus
quota.
There is a positive relationship between:
As indicated above, based on the Plank and Reid
(1994) model, it may be possible that the
relationship between salesperson behaviors and
salesperson effectiveness measures may be
indirect through the quality of adaptive selling
behaviors. But, consistent with the theories
discussed above and the Walker, Churchill, and
Ford (1979) model we present the following
hypotheses:
The link between active listening, Interpersonal
Listening in the Personal Selling Environment
Castleberry et al., (1999), and measures of
salesperson effectiveness would be expected
based on Kohli et al.’s (1998) conclusion that the
accumulated knowledge and learning of
individual organizational members are the only
sources of sustainable competitive advantage.
Castleberry et al., (1993) discuss how Spiro and
Weitz (1990) arguments for the adaptive sellingperformance link also provide a theoretical
justification for the expectation of a relationship
between salesperson listening and salesperson
effectiveness. Sharma and Lambert’s (1994)
study found that inaccurate salesperson’s
perceptions of customers led to negative
salesperson effectiveness. These links may be
mediated by the quality of listening behaviors,
consistent with the Plank and Reid (1994) model.
However, consistent with previous empirical
evidence the theories discussed earlier, and the
Walker, Churchill, and Ford (1979) model we
hypothesize that:
There is a positive relationship between:
H12: Adaptive Selling and Customer Retention.
H13: Adaptive Selling and Percent Quota.
Customer Orientation (Saxe and Weitz, 1982) is
described as behaviors directed toward
determining and understanding the needs of the
target customer and adapting the selling
organization’s response in order to satisfy those
needs better than the competition, providing a
competitive advantage, leading to superior
salesperson effectiveness. Empirical studies have
supported this supposition (e.g. Sigauw et al.,
1994). It is possible, however that the presence
of other salesperson behaviors in a more
comprehensive model may result in insignificant
links to effectiveness measures. It is also possible
that, consistent with the Plank and Reid (1994)
model that the quality of customer orientation
behaviors may mediate relationships between
customer orientation and effectiveness measures.
However, consistent with previous empirical
evidence the theories discussed earlier, and the
Walker, Churchill, and Ford (1979) model we
hypothesize that:
H14: Customer Orientation and Customer
Retention.
H15: Customer Orientation and Percent Quota.
There is a positive relationship between:
H16: Interpersonal Listening in Personal Selling
and Customer Retention.
H17: Interpersonal Listening in Personal Selling
and Percent Quota.
A salesperson cannot be customer oriented
unless he/she develops a good understanding of
customer needs through effective listening
(Ramsey and Sohli, 1997), 2) analyzes and
understands customer problems, and 3) tailors
products and services to meet customer needs
and solve their problems (Saxe and Weitz, 1982).
Vol. 9, No. 4
50
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Figure 1: Theoretical Model
Customer
Orientation
(CO)
H14
H15
CUSTOMER
RETENTION
1
H1
H9
Adaptive
Selling
(Adapts)
H7
2
H1
H
H18
H13
6
PERCENTILE
QUOTA
H16
H8
Salesperson
Consulting
(SALCONS)
Behaviors
H1
0
H17
H4
Listening
(ILPS)
H2
H3
Consulting
Effectiveness
(CONSEFF)
H5
H1
Performance
Effectiveness
Model Fit: Chi-square 333, d.f. 151; NFI .932; FRI .905; IFI .961; TLI .946; CFI .961; RMSEA .054;
PNFI .670; SMC SALCONS: .335; SMC CONSEFF: .246; SMC Percent Quota: .317; SMC Retention:
Given the documented relationships between
those behaviors, the model will assume
covariance links between those behaviors. Figure
1 illustrates the hypothesized relationships,
which assume both direct links from behaviors
to effectiveness (Walker, Churchill, and Ford
model) and indirect links (Plank and Reid
model).
Reicheld (1996) document a positive relationship
between customer retention and firm
performance (sales and profit). This implies a
possible equivalent relationship at the
salesperson level. Thus the following is a
replication hypothesis:
Northern Illinois University
H18: There is a positive relationship between
Customer Retention and Percent Quota.
METHOD
The sample was obtained by utilizing an Internet
panel operated by Markettools.
ZoomPanel, an actively managed on line panel
community devoted to supporting market
research. Controls are established to detect
questionable survey taking behavior and remove
bad data from the data set. An invitation to
participate in this study was sent to the 2,316
panelists who indicated that their profession was
full-time, non-retail sales. In addition, a screening
question to eliminate those involved in retail
Academic Article
sales was utilized as a panelist may have changed
occupation since joining the panel.
Given Weitz’s (1981) conclusion that much of
the previous research on sales performance was
contradictory or inconclusive because of
overgeneralization across too many situations,
this study’s sample was limited to non-retail
salespeople. Non-retail salespeople are less likely
to engage in purely transactional selling,
providing more opportunities for consulting.
Four hundred and twenty panelists completed
the entire questionnaire. The response rate is
18.1% (420/2,316) for respondents meeting the
screening criteria. There were 27 respondents
who did not meet the screening criteria. The
composition of respondents were: 22%
manufacturing, 12 % professional services, 2%
pharmaceutical representatives, and 65% other
services. By way of comparison, the composition
of non-retail salespeople, as measured by the
2000 U.S. Census of Business, is 32%
manufacturing/wholesale sales representatives
and 68% service sales representatives. Early
responders and late responders were compared
based on the above proportions, as well as a
comparison of the means for the constructs of
interest and there were no significant differences
(Armstrong and Overton, 1977).
There could be a concern that the diversity of
this study’s sampling frame could mask
relationships if there are significant differences in
relationships across types of selling situations.
Pelham (2002a) discusses why the extent and
outcomes of sales consulting could differ across
typologies of selling positions. But his (2002b)
study found that the there were few significant
differences in levels of sales force consulting
behavior or consulting effectiveness across types
of manufacturing industries although the
relationship was somewhat stronger in low
customer/product differentiation industries. A
Fall 2009 51
study of means of the variables of interest found
no difference between manufacturing
salesperson’s responses and service salesperson’s
responses. For instance, the mean for
salesperson consulting (with a scale from 1 to 7)
in the manufacturing sub-sample was 4.6 (s.d.
1.3), compared to 4.7 (s.d. 1.4) for the service
sub-sample. The mean for consulting
effectiveness (with a scale from 1 to 10) in the
manufacturing sub-sample is 5.0 (s.d. 1.3),
compared to 4.9 (s.d. 1.4) for the service subsample.
A study of correlations between variables of
interest, with the sample split between
manufacturing and service firms, found no
significant differences, which is consistent with
Franke and Park’s (2006) conclusion in their
meta-analysis that there is little evidence of
moderators of ADAPTS or CO.
Hypotheses were tested using SEM (AMOS 5.0).
Bi-variate correlations indicated that none
exceeded the level of .8 indicated by Gujarati
(2003) as an indication of a serious level of
multicollinearity. Variance Inflation Factor (VIF)
levels were examined and no variable exceeded
the level of 10, considered by Kleinbaum (1988)
to indicate a highly collinear variable.
Although the survey items were derived from
scales validated in previous research,
confirmatory factor analysis was conducted,
given the documented high correlations between
behavioral constructs. Some items were
eliminated from these previously validated scales
due to low loadings on the appropriate construct.
These low loadings on validated constructs are
due to the high correlations between salesperson
behaviors in this study. This was not the
situation when those scales were validated in the
original studies. Researchers can contact the
authors for the items used to represent
constructs and the results of CFA.
Vol. 9, No. 4
52
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
The measurement model achieved good fit
indices. The model fit statistics were: Chi-Square
188.4, d.f. 71; p= .000; NFI .95; RFI .93;
IFI .969; TLI .95; CFI .97; and RMSEA .063.The
SMC (squared multiple correlation) score for a
latent performance variable combining quota
performance and retention performance was
below .50 and therefore it was not possible to
include a multiple item effectiveness construct.
The parameters for the items measuring the
latent variables were significant. The average
variance extracted of .50 equals the cutoff level
of .50 level suggested by Bagozzi and Yi (1988).
The average variance extracted values for the
remaining latent variables are at 50 or above
(Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). Discriminant validity is
indicated for all constructs by noting that the
squared correlations of the constructs with each
other is less than the average variance extracted
values for each construct (Hair et al. 2006). All
items had significant regression weights on the
construct. However, there were three construct
items included in the model with SMC scores
below .5, which negatively affected model fit.
Future studies should seek to improve construct
measurement to deal with the high correlations
between behavioral variables.
Four items were chosen from Robinson et al.’s
(2002) shortened five item version of Spiro and
Weitz’s (1990) ADAPTS scale. These four
Adaptive Selling items achieved a good
coefficient alpha score of .86. SMC levels range
from .46 to .74. The item eliminated (I try to
understand how one customer differs from
another.) was eliminated because of a low factor
loading and SMC score. It also tends to measure
a motivational aspect of adaptive selling versus
the behaviors which the focus of this study.
Five items measuring salesperson customer
orientation were derived from Periatt et al.’s
(2004) shortened version of Saxe and Weitz’s
Northern Illinois University
(1982) customer orientation component of their
SOCO (Selling Or ient at ion/Cus tom er
Orientation) scale. The coefficient alpha score for
these five items was .93 and SMC levels range
from .64 to .84.
Factor analysis reduced the original fourteenitem ILPS scale (Castleberry and Shepherd,
1993) to four items (Appendix 1). The four-item
scale resulted in a coefficient alpha score of .87
(compared to .93 for the full 14 item scale). All
four items achieved significant regression
weights on the construct and squared multiple
correlation levels ranged from .57 to .69. .The
four items retained were: I wait for the buyer to
finish speaking before evaluating what has been
said; I ask clarifying questions like "I'm not sure
I know what you mean”; I restate what the
buyer has stated or asked; I summarize what the
buyer has said. Some of the items eliminated
measured motivation rather than behavior, such
as: I make an effort to understand the buyer's
point of view; I try to find things I have in
common with the buyer. Other items eliminated
were very similar to the retained items and seem
to be included in the original scale to measure
respondent consistency.
There is concern whether the four items
measure the same construct as the original one.
However, when the shortened four-item
construct was substituted for the full fourteen
item construct in multiple regression models
there was no significant differences in the size of
the parameters or their significance.
Three sales consulting (SALCONS) items, of
seven items tested, achieved acceptable squared
multiple correlation scores. These measures
sought to provide more detail than Pelham’s
(2002b) single measure of non-buyer consulting
time, which used a constant sum question to
comparing salesperson’s time talking (about
Fall 2009 53
Academic Article
experiences /problems with the company’s
product) with engineers, users, and other
customer employees, compared to time spent
talking to buyers/purchasing agents.
Salesperson Consulting Effectiveness
(CONSEFF) was measured with two items based
on the measures from Pelham’s (2002b) study.
The parameters for the items were significant in
the measurement model. The correlation
between the two measures of consulting
effectiveness was .63.
The use of salespeople as respondents for
independent and dependent variables and the
high level of correlations between variables of
interest raise the issue of common method
variance. However, those high correlations were
also found in other studies of relationships
between salesperson behaviors and relationships
between salesperson behaviors and outcomes
(Franke and Park, 2006; Castleberry et al.1999;
Pelham, 2002b; Ramsey and Sohi, 1997). A
salesperson’s reports of the levels of behaviors
and performance could have an upward bias due
to desires for social acceptability. However,
Churchill et al. (1985) conclude in their metaanalysis that self-report measures of performance
do not demonstrate any particular upward bias.
Recently, Franke and Park’s (2006) meta-analysis
noted significant correlations between self-rated,
manager rated, and objective measures of
performance. Tests were conducted to estimate
the extent of common method variance.
Applying Harmon’s one factor test (Podsakoff
and Organ, 1986) did not reveal one general
factor accounting for most of the covariance
between independent and dependent variables.
Confirmatory factor analysis, assuming one
factor with all items, revealed a poor model fit
(RMSEA = .15). Poor fit was consistent in both
high and low performance sub-groups. Partial
correlations between SALCONS and
CONSEFF, as well as CONSEFF and the
combined performance variable, remain
significant, controlling for the “method factor.”
RESULTS
Table 1 provides the standardized regression
parameters, their significance, and model fit for
the theoretical model testing direct and indirect
links between behaviors, performance, and
effectiveness. The results of a reduced model
results, a nested model with only significant
effects, is provided in the last column, this
reduced model gives an indication as to whether
the influence of a behavior on outcomes is direct
or indirect. The theoretical model fit statistics
indicate a reasonable fit with fit indices above .9
and RMSEA at .054. The model’s p statistic is
below .05, reflecting the large sample size (n =
420). The Hoelter (1983) statistic indicates that
the sample size would have to be less than 228
for the significance level to exceed .05. The SMC
(squared multiple correlations) for dependent
variables indicate a reasonable amount of
variance explained (SALCONS .34;
CONSEFF .25; PERCENT QUOTA .32; and
RETENTION .34). The NFI, RFI, IFI, TLI,
and CFI fit statistics for the reduced model are
very similar to the theoretical model, while the
PNFI and PCFI fit statistics are improved in the
reduced model due to the reduced number of
parameters.
The parameters linking Sales Consulting
(SALCONS) to Consulting Effectiveness
(CONSEFF) and Customer Retention are
positive and significant (.242, p < .01; .190, p
< .01), leading to acceptance of hypotheses 1
and 2. The link from SALCONS to Percent
Quota is not significant. Thus hypothesis 3 is
rejected. This lack of significance is due to the
inclusion of CONSEFF in the model as a
mediating variable, since the bivariate correlation
between SALCONS and Percent Quota is
Vol. 9, No. 4
54
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Hypotheses
Table 1: Simultaneous Equation Model Statistics (n = 420)
IndependentDependentVariTheoretical
Reduced Model 2;
1
SALCONS
CONSEFF
.242**
.337***
2
3
4
SALCONS
SALCONS
CONSEFF
RETENTION
PERRETENTION
.190**
-.057
.325***
.200***
5
6
7
8
9
10
CONSEFF
ADAPTS
ADAPTS
ILPS
CO
ILPS
PERCONSEFF
SALCONS
SALCONS
SALCONS
CONSEFF
.454***
.163*
.135*
.395***
.140
.143
.493***
.248***
.179**
.484***
CO
ADAPTS
ADAPTS
CO
CO
ILPS
ILPS
RETENTION
CONSEFF
RETENTION
PERRETENTION
PERRETENTION
PERPER-
.074
.075
-.02
.160*
.045
.012
.120*
.106
332.8
151
2.204
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Chi-Sq.
d.f.
Chi.Sq./d.f.
.354**
.207***
.149**
349.7
160
2.186
p
.000
.000
NFI (2)
.932
.928
RFI (3)
.905
.906
IFI (4)
TLI (5)
.961
.946
.960
.947
CFI (6)
RMSEA (7)
PNFI (8)
PCFI (8)
Hoelter (9)
SMC
SMC
SMC
CONSEFF
PERRETENTION
.961
.054
.670
.691
228
.246
.317
.343
.959
.053
.707
.731
229
.243
.311
.345
SALCONS
.335
.348
SMC
Note:
1. * = p < .05; ** = p< .01; *** = p< .001
Northern Illinois University
Academic Article
positive (.17) and significant (p < .001). Since
the link between CONSEFF and PERCENT
Quota is significant, CONSEFF serves as a
mediator in the relationship. Thus the influence
of sales consulting on percent quota is indirect.
This result provides only partial support for
Plank and Reid’s (1994) mediating model since
the link between SALCONS and Customer
Retention is significant.
The parameters linking Consulting Effectiveness
(CONSEFF) to Customer Retention and Percent
Quota are positive and significant (.325, p
< .001; .454, p < .001). Thus, hypotheses 4 and 5
are accepted. CONSEFF is responsible for the
largest influence on those two measures of
effectiveness, when both direct and indirect
effects are considered (Table 2). These results, at
the salesperson level, are similar, to Pelham’s
(2006) results, indicating a positive link between
sales-force consulting effectiveness and firm
performance. Given the non-significant link
between Salesperson Consulting and Percent
Quota and the significant link between Sales
Consulting and Consulting Effectiveness, we can
conclude that Consulting Effectiveness acts as a
full mediator in the relationship between
Salesperson Consulting and Percent Quota.
The parameters linking Adaptive Selling
(ADAPTS) to CONSEFF AND SALCONS are
positive and significant (.163, p < .05; .135, p
< .05), leading to the acceptance of hypotheses 6
and 7. Given these results, it can be concluded
that Salesperson Consulting partial mediates the
relationship between Adaptive Selling and
Consulting Effectiveness. The parameters linking
ADAPTS to Customer Retention, as well as
Percent Quota are not significant, leading to
rejection of hypotheses 12 and 13. These results
appear contrary to those cited in Franke and
Park’s (2006) meta-analysis, however those
results were bivariate correlations. This study’s
Fall 2009 55
non-significant parameters are due to the
inclusion of other behaviors and consulting
effectiveness into the model. The correlations
between ADAPTS, Retention, and Percent
Quota based upon the data in this study are .34
(p < .001) and .22 (p < .001) which are
consistent with the studies cited by Franke and
Park. Since the link from ADAPTS to
CONSEFF is significant, CONSEFF acts as a
full mediator in the relationship between
ADAPTS and Percent Quota as well as
Customer Retention. These results support Plank
and Reid’s (1994) model.
The parameter linking active listening (ILPS) and
SALCONS is positive and significant (.395, p
< .001). Therefore, hypothesis 8 is accepted.
However, the link between Customer
Orientation (CO) and SALCONS is not
significant, leading to the rejection of hypothesis
9. This lack of significance is due to the inclusion
of other correlated antecedent behaviors in the
model, since the bivariate correlation between
CO and SALCONS is positive (.32) and
significant (p < .001). The correlations between
variables are provided in Appendix 3. As
indicated in Table 2, providing both direct and
indirect effects, ILPS has the largest total effect
on Salesperson Consulting.
The parameter linking ILPS to CONSEFF is not
significant, leading to the rejection of hypotheses
10. This result is due to the inclusion of
SALSONS in the model, since the bivariate
correlation between ILPS and CONSEFF is
positive (.51) and significant (p < .001). Thus
Salesperson Consulting acts as a full mediator in
the relationship between ILPS and CONSEFF.
The link between ILPS and RETENTION is not
significant, leading to rejection of hypothesis 16.
This result is not consistent with Ramsey and
Sohi’s (1997) significant relationship between
ILPS and customer intentions to continue future
Vol. 9, No. 4
56
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Table 2
Standardized Total, Direct, and Indirect Effects Reduced Model of Significant
Effects Only
Independent Variables
CO
ILPS
ADAPTS SALCONS
SALCONS
.14
.40
.14
CONSEFF
.11
.24
.20
.24
RETENTION
.22
.16
.16
.27
.33
PERCENT QUOTA
.11
.22
.08
.08
.49
SALCONS
.14
.40
.14
CONSEFF
.08
.14
.16
.24
RETENTION
.16
.01
.08
.19
.33
PERCENT QUOTA
.05
.12
-.02
-.06
.45
.11
CONSEFF
.03
.10
.03
RETENTION
.06
.15
.08
.08
PERCENT QUOTA
.06
.10
.10
.14
.03
.00
Dependent Variable
CONSEFF
RETENTION
Total:
.11
Direct:
Indirect
SALCONS
interactions. However, the bivariate correlation
(see Appendix) between ILPS and Customer
Retention in this study is positive and significant
(.44, p < .001). Since the link between ILPS and
SALCONS and the link between CONSEFF and
RETENTION are significant, Salesperson
Consulting and the immediate outcome of
S a le s p e r s o n C o n s u l t i n g ( C o n s u l t i ng
Effectiveness) mediate the relationship between
active listening and Retention.. However, the
parameter linking ILPS to PERCENT QUOTA
is positive and significant (.12, p< .01) , leading
to the acceptance of hypothesis 17. The
parameter linking active listening (ILPS) to
Customer Retention is not significant, leading to
rejection of hypotheses 16. These results provide
Northern Illinois University
only partial support for Plank and Reid’s (1994)
mediating model. The parameter linking CO to
SALCONS is not significant, leading to the
rejection of hypothesis 10. Again, this result is
due to the inclusion of other antecedent variables
since the bivariate correlation between CO and
SALCONS is positive (.32) and significant
(p< .001). The parameter linking CO to
CONSEFF is not significant. Thus, hypothesis
11 is rejected. This result is due to the inclusion
of SALCONS as a mediating variable, since the
bivariate correlation between CO and
CONSEFF is positive (.41) and significant (p
< .001). As indicated in Table 2, indicating direct
and indirect effects, with the inclusion of other
Fall 2009 57
Academic Article
behaviors in the model, CO has the weakest
influence on CONSEFF.
The parameter linking CO to Customer
Retention is positive and significant (.16, p
< .05), leading to acceptance of hypotheses 14.
This finding is consistent with Williams’ (1998)
results, which found a strong link between
customer orientation and customer commitment.
However, the parameter linking CO to Percent
Quota is not significant, leading to rejection
hypotheses 15. It should be noted, however, that
the bivariate correlation between CO and
Percent Quota is positive and significant (.29, p
< .001). Again, the lack of a significant
parameter between those two variables may be
due to the inclusion of other behaviors in this
study’s model. These results do not provide
support to Plank and Reid’s (1994) model.
The parameter linking salesperson Customer
Retention to salesperson Percent Quota is not
significant. Thus, hypothesis 18 is rejected. There
is, however, a positive and significant bi-variate
correlation between these two variables (.36, p
< .001), which consistent, with Reicheld's study
(1996) documenting a positive relationship
between firm level customer retention and firm
performance. The lack of a significant parameter
link between the variables is due to the strong
influence of CONSEFF on both Customer
Retention and Percent Quota.
It should be noted that the covariance links
between ADAPTS, CO, and ILPS are positive
and significant, as would be expected from the
studies cited in Franke and Park’s meta-analysis.
The covariance link between ADAPTS and CO
is .54 (p < .001). The covariance link between
ADAPTS and ILPS is .428 (p < .001) and the
covariance link between CO and ILPS is .57 (p
< .001). Therefore, it can be concluded that,
while some of the links between those behaviors
and outcome variables were not significant, those
variables do have an influence on those variables
though supporting relationships with other
behaviors.
Figure 2 illustrates a model with only the
significant links documented in the last column
of Table 1. The model fit statistics provided at
the bottom of Figure 2 indicate that there is little
change in the fit statistics in this reduced model,
compared to the full model with all links. The
few direct links (two of six) between the
antecedent variables of ADAPTS, CO, and ILPS
with effectiveness variable provide partial
support Plank and Reid’s (1994) model
suggesting that the influence of salespeople’s
behaviors are mediated by immediate behavioral
quality variables. It is possible that the direct
effects found in this study between behaviors
and quota or retention may be due to the lack of
inclusion of selling behaviors with buyers/
decision-makers. Future research should rectify
this omission to provide a more robust test of
the Plank and Reid (1994) model.
DISCUSSION
This study’s results suggesting the full or partial
mediating influence of Consulting Effectiveness
in relationships between salesperson behaviors
and measures of effectiveness provide partial
support for Plank and Reid’s (1994) model. This
study extends the findings of Pelham’s (2006)
firm level study of the impact of consulting
behaviors, by indicating the supporting role of
adaptive, customer oriented, and listening
behaviors in the influence of those consulting
behaviors on the quality of those behaviors
(consulting effectiveness). The results of this
study, at the salesperson level, extend Pelham’s
Vol. 9, No. 4
58
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Figure 2: Significant Effects Model
Customer
Orientation
(CO)
Adaptive
Selling
(Adapts)
Listening
(ILPS)
H7
H14
CUSTOMER
RETENTION
H6
PERCENTILE
QUOTA
H17
H4
H8
Salesperson
Consulting
(SALCONS)
Behaviors
H2
Consulting
Effectiveness
(CONSEFF)
H1
Performance
(2006) findings, at the sales-force level, of a
positive influence of consulting effectiveness on
ultimate firm performance (profit). It does so by
measuring the influence of salesperson behaviors
and salesperson consulting behaviors on
individual performance outcomes more directly
under the control of the salesperson, namely the
retention of the salesperson’s customers and
quota performance. In this study, consulting
effectiveness was the strongest influence on
customer retention and percent quota,
reinforcing Reicheld's (1996) suggestions as to
the benefits of enhancing product value for
customers. This study’s finding of a significant
link between Adaptive Selling, as well as
Listening, and Salesperson Consulting and the
Northern Illinois University
H5
Effectiveness
finding of significant links between Adaptive
Selling, as well as Salesperson Consulting, and
Consulting Effectiveness, at the salesperson
level, extend Pelham’s (2002B) results, at the
firm level. This study also extends Pelham’s
(2002B) results by providing more
comprehensive measurement of the Salesperson
Consulting construct.
This study’s finding of direct and indirect links
between sales consulting and salesperson
effectiveness measures is similar to Anglin et al.’s
results, (1990) finding a significant relationship
between their Adaptive Selling behavior of
contacting others in the buying organization and
objectively measured salesperson market share.
The results of this study also lend support to
Academic Article
arguments of Flaherety et al., (1999) that
salespeople should focus more on solving
customer problems and adding value to the
customer’s business. This study results suggest
that management, in appropriate business-to
business contexts, should encourage their salesforce to increase consulting activities with their
customers and evaluate the quality of those
outcomes.
The significant influence of active listening
supports Wotruba's (1996) argument that
salesperson listening is crucial for the
development of mutually beneficial long-term
relationships with customers. The indirect
influences of ILPS on customer retention
reinforce Ramsey and Sohi’s (1997) finding that
the customer’s perception of listening behavior is
positively related with the anticipation of future
interaction with the salesperson.
MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS
Given the importance of salesperson consulting
effectiveness suggested by this study, the
implication for sales managers is that sales
training, evaluation, and reward programs should
be adjusted to foster more high quality
consulting related behaviors. Sales training today
still is heavily oriented toward product
knowledge and the feature/benefit/closing
aspects of the selling encounter. Pelham (2002a)
found little sales training content related to active
listening exercises or problem diagnosis
exercises, despite studies indicating that
customers are seeking more assistance in
problem solving. He cited studies indicating that
poor salesperson listening skills and inadequate
problem diagnosis skills were leading causes of
poor performance.
If a firm does not provide adequate active
listening/diagnostic question training and followup evaluation by sales managers, then a
Fall 2009 59
salesperson who seeks to engage in consulting
efforts with customers can only learn consulting
skills through trial and error. The lack of such
training or evaluation also sends a message that
these behaviors are not valued by the firm,
reducing the likelihood of salesperson
consulting.
Pelham (2002b) found that an evaluation
program that includes measures of the quality of
consulting efforts has a more powerful influence
on sales-force consulting than the commission
program. This study reinforces the need to pay
more attention to the immediate outcomes of
consulting efforts in terms of savings in the use
of the product. Such emphasis might include
sales managers accompanying salespeople on
service visits with product users, technical
personnel, and production personnel. The sales
manager would then be in a position judge the
quality of diagnostic questions in these
encounters. Sales managers could also follow up
with customers to monitor the outcomes of
previous consulting efforts.
This study reinforces Pelham’s (2002a)
arguments for the importance of salesperson
consulting, in business-to-business contexts,
given its mediating influence in relationships
between adaptive selling/listening behaviors,
consulting effectiveness, and customer retention.
The implication for sales managers is that there
should be more attention paid in salesperson
evaluation to the quality of salesperson
behaviors, including consulting related behaviors.
The quality of behaviors is under more
salesperson control, compared to output
measures, such quota performance.
Unfortunately, given senior management
pressure to achieving quarterly sales results, there
is the natural tendency for a sales manager to be
preoccupied with inputs such as prospecting or
sales calls and outputs such as orders. Pressures
Vol. 9, No. 4
60
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
to achieve short term sales results can also result
in too much emphasis on sales presentations to
secure orders at the expense of service calls to
strengthen long term customer relationships. If
salespeople are only measured and rewarded
based upon input and output quantity,
disregarding the quality of the inputs, there is the
also potential for counterproductive behaviors.
Some examples of the counterproductive
behaviors are: excessive discounting, premature
closing, and pushing products/services that do
not adequately solve customer problems.
Inadequate emphasis on active listening and
problem diagnosis in training and evaluation
programs reinforce those counterproductive
behaviors because salespeople will tend to
shorten the needs discovery step in the sales
process, leading to premature presentation of
product features and benefits before adequate
understanding of the customer's situation.
But if the quality of a salespersons' behaviors,
especially consulting behaviors, is adequately
measured this should encourage more of those
behaviors and as well as greater motivation to
improve the effectiveness of those behaviors.
Behavioral quality evaluation would be most
effectively measured by sales management
observation. But given the limited time available
to perform these observations of the salespeople
reporting to a sales manager, formal customer
surveys of the extent of value added from
salespersons' efforts could supplement
observation.
Post sales call reviews by sales managers should
include critiques of pre-call information
gathering on the customer and customer's
industry. The sales manager should: 1) review the
salesperson's depth of understanding of the
customer's situation, including the customer's
goals and obstacles to those goals, 2) review the
extent and quality of the salesperson's diagnostic
Northern Illinois University
questions raised with customer production or
technical personnel, 3) evaluate the salesperson's
ability to dig deeply with his/her questions into
the customer's processes searching for
inefficiencies 4) evaluate the salesperson's ability
to aid the customer in reduction of process steps
5) evaluate the salesperson's ability to participate
in product modification designed to increase
customer efficiency, 5) evaluate the salesperson's
ability to suggest appropriate outsourcing of
activities and 6) evaluate the salesperson's ability
to aid customers in efforts to increase sales
through enhanced product quality or more
effective marketing efforts.
Sales managers who appreciate the value of
effective salesperson consulting to enhance
product/service value should modify the nature
of sales meetings. In addition to recognition of
star sales versus quota performers, salespeople
who saved their customers the most money
should also be recognized. In sales meetings,
experienced sales consultants should share how
they went about discovering money-saving
efficiencies in the use of their products or
services.
Sharing of customer cost-saving
scenarios would also benefit experienced
salespeople by expanding their ability to
creatively modify solutions across differing
customer environments. Star salesperson
consultants would probably share how they
developed a deep knowledge of the customer's
industry, such as participation in customer trade
associations. These consulting related sales
meeting events would positively influence the
motivation of less experienced salespeople to
increase consulting activities, as well as suggest
scenarios that could act as a framework for
consulting behaviors.
The direct links, in this study, between
consulting related behaviors and quota percentile
suggest potential benefits in sales presentation
Academic Article
effectiveness. The modification of sales training
and evaluation programs to include more active
listening and diagnostic skill training would not
only enhance the quality of consulting activities
with current customers, but also should improve
the effectiveness of selling activities with
prospective customers. The skills needed to
adequately uncover inefficiencies in the customer
processes and to work with customers on
solutions would be beneficial in working with
prospective customers on their problems, leading
to increased levels on new customers.
Sales management activities that encourage
consulting efforts and monitor the effectiveness
of those efforts would also tend to influence the
firm's culture to be more market oriented,
characterized by widely held values emphasizing
customer satisfaction. If this were to occur the
firm would begin to see the benefits associated
with high customer retention.
LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
A limitation of this study is that it measured the
quality of adaptive, customer oriented, listening,
and consulting behaviors only from the
standpoint of the extent of value added for the
customer from non-selling activities. This study
did not measure or investigate the influence of
other possible measures of the quality of selling
activities, which could have also mediated the
influence of these behaviors on salespeople’s
effectiveness. An example of such a measure
might be customer feedback as to the
persuasiveness of sales presentations. The lack of
such a selling activity outcome variable could
explain this study’s finding of some direct
influences of salesperson behaviors on measures
of effectiveness. Future studies should rectify
this omission. The model tested in this study is
Fall 2009 61
an incomplete model of the antecedents and
consequences of salesperson buyer/non-buyer
interaction behaviors. The model did not include
organizational and environmental variables that
should moderate the influence of salesperson
interaction performance and effectiveness,
consistent with Weitz’s (1981) contingency
model of salesperson effectiveness
The model examined in this study did not
include salesperson interaction behaviors with
buyer/decision makers and the outcomes of
those behaviors. An indication of the need to
include these behaviors in future models of
salesperson performance and effectiveness is
indicated by the results of a study by Anglin et
al., (1990) which found significant correlations
between various subjective measures of
salesperson interaction performance, such as
clear presentations and handling of objections,
and salesperson effectiveness measures.
Inclusion of these variables would provide a
more thorough test of Plank and Reid’s (1994)
model.
The model also did not include other salesperson
consulting behaviors, such as the involvement of
the salesperson with internal selling firm
personnel in the modification of the product or
service to better meet customer needs. Future
studies should include other key constructs in
testing of the relationships between sales
consulting behaviors, sales consulting
performance, and salesperson effectiveness.
In addition, the retention and quota percentile
measures in this study did not successfully
combine into one effectiveness construct.
Future studies should develop a composite
effectiveness outcome variable with multiple
items.
As indicated in the methods section, the
respondent for both independent and
Vol. 9, No. 4
62
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
dependent variables were salespeople. Despite
tests indicating that common methods variance
did not present a serious problem, future studies
should endeavor to measure performance based
on sales manager reports. Thus, the conclusions
based on this exploratory study must be
considered tentative due to factors stated above.
Future studied should also endeavor to utilize
longitudinal performance and effectiveness data
in order to draw causal implications.
Anglin, Kenneth A., Jeffrey J. Stolman, and
James W. Gentry (1990), “The Congruence
of Manager Perception of Salesperson
Performance and Knowledge-Based
Measures of Adaptive Selling,” Journal of
Personal Selling and Sales Management, 10, Fall,
81-90.
Baber, Michael (1997), How Champions Sell, New
York: AMACOM, a division of the
American Management Association.
Bagozzi, Richard P., and Youjae Yi (1988), “On
the Evaluation of Structural Equation
Models,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 16, 2, 74-94.
Alfred M. Pelham
Phone: 609-771-3027
FAX: 609-637-5129
Email Pelham@tcnj.edu
Louis Tucci
Phone: 609-771-2900
Email: ltucci@tcnj.edu
Castleberry, Stephen B., C. David Shepherd, and
Rick Ridnour (1999), “Effective
Interpersonal Listening in the Personal
Selling Environment: Conceptualization,
Measurement, and Nomological Validity,”
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 7, 1, 30
-38.
The College of New Jersey
PO Box 7718
2000 Pennington Rd.
Ewing, NJ 08628-0718
Castleberry, Stephen B., C. David Shepherd
(1993), “Effective Interpersonal Listening
and Personal Selling,” Journal of Personal
Selling and Sales Management, 13, Winter, 3549
REFERENCES
Churchill, Gilbert A., Jr., Neil M. Ford, Steven
W. Hartley, and Orville C. Walker, Jr.
(1985), The Determinants of Salesperson
Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of
Marketing Research, 22 (May), 103-118.
Alloy, L.B. and Tabachnik, N. (1984),
“Assessment of Covariation by Humans and
Animals: the Joint Influence of Prior
Expectation and Current Situational
Information,” Psychological Review, 91, 112149.
Armstrong, J. Scott and Terry Overton (1977),
“Estimating Non-response Bias in Mail
Surveys,” Journal of Marketing Research, 14,
August, 396-402.
Northern Illinois University
Flaherty, T.B., R. Dahlstrom, and S.J. Skinner
(1999), “Organizational Values and Job
Stress as Determinants of CustomerOriented Sales Performance,” Journal of
Personal Selling and Sales Performance, 19, 2, 118.
Franke, George R and Jeong-Eun Park (2006),
“Salesperson Adaptive Selling Behavior and
Customer Orientation: A Meta Analysis,”
Journal of Marketing Research, 43, 4
(November), 693-702.
Academic Article
Griffin, A. and R.R. Hauser (1992), “Patterns of
Communications among Marketing,
Engineering, and Manufacturing-A
Comparison Between Two Product Teams,”
Management Science, 38, 1, 360-373.
Gujarati, D.N. (2003), Basic Econometrics, 4th Ed.,
McGraw-Hill International Edition.
Hair, Joseph F., William C. Black, Barry J.
Babin, Rolph E. Anderson, and Ronald L.
Tatham (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th
Ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall.Heider, F. (1958), The Psychology of
Interpersonal Relations, Hillsdale, N.Y.:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Johlke, Mark C.
(2006), “Sales Presentation Skills and
Salesperson Job Performance,” The Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, 21, 5, 311321.
Kohli, Ajay K., Tasadduq A. Shervani, and
Goutam N. Changalla (1998), “Learning and
Performance Orientation of Salespeople:
The Role of Supervisors,” Journal of
Marketing Research, May, 263-274.
Kleinbaum, D.G., L.L. Kupper, and K.E. Miller
(1988), Applied Regression Analysis and Other
Multivariate Methods, 2nd Ed., Boston, MA:
DWS Kent.
Pelham, Alfred (2002a), “An Exploratory Model
and Initial Test of the Influence of Firm
Level Consulting–Oriented Sales Force
Programs on Sales Force Performance,”
Journal of Personal Selling And Sales
Management, 22, 2 (Spring), 97-109.
Pelham, Alfred (2002b), “The Direct and
Moderating Influence of the Industry
Environment on Industrial Sales Force
Consulting Behaviors and Consulting
Effectiveness,” The Journal of Selling and Major
Account Management, 4, 2, 45-68.
Fall 2009 63
Pelham, Alfred (2006), “Sales-Force
Involvement in Product Design: The
Influence on the Relationships Between
Consulting-Oriented Sales Management
Programs and Performance,” Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, 14, 1, 37-55.
Periatt, Jeffery, Stephen A LeMay, and Subhra
Chakrabarty (2004) “The Selling Orientation
-Customer Orientation (SOCO SCALE:
Cross-Validation of the Revised Version,”
The Journal of Personal Selling & Sales
Management, 24, 1, 49-54.
Plank, Richard E. and David A. Reid (1994),
“The Mediating Role of Sales Behaviors: An
alternative Perspective of Sales Performance
and Effectiveness,” Journal of Personal Selling
and Sales Management, 14, 3 (Summer), 43-56.
Podsakoff, Phillip M. and Dennis W. Organ,
(1986), “Self Reports in Organizational
Research, Problems, and Prospects,” Journal
of Management, 12, 4, 531-544.
Ramsey, Rosemary P. and Ravipreet S. Sohi
(1997), “Listening to Your Customers: The
Impact of Perceived Salesperson Listening
Behavior on Relationship Outcomes,”
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25,
2, 127-137.
Reicheld, Frederick F. (1996), Loyalty Effect:
The Hidden Face Behind Growth, Profits, and
Lasting Value. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Business School Press
.Robinson, Leroy Jr., Greg W. Marshall, William
C. Moncrief, Felicia G. Lassk (2002),
“Toward a Shortened Version of Adaptive
Selling,” Journal of Personal Selling and Sales
Management, 22, 2 (Spring), 111-119.
Saxe, Robert and Weitz, Barton (1982), “The
Customer Orientation of Sales People:
Measurement and Relationship to
Performance,” Journal of Marketing Research,
19 (August), 343-351.
Vol. 9, No. 4
64
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
Sharma, Arun and Lambert, Douglas (1994),
"How Accurate are Salesperson's
Perceptions of their Customers?" Industrial
Marketing Management, 23, 4, 357-365.
Sigauw, Judy A., Gene Brown, and Robert E.
Widing, II (1994), “The Influence of the
Market Orientation of the Firm on Sales
Force Behavior and Attitudes,” Journal of
Marketing Research, 31, 1 (February), 106-116.
Spiro, Rosann and Barton Weitz (1990),
“Adaptive Selling: Conceptualization,
Measurement, and Validity,” Journal of
Marketing Research, 27 (February), 61-69.
Walker, Orville C., Gilbert A. Churchill, and
Neil M. Ford (1979), “Where Do We Go
From Here? Some Selected Conceptual and
Empirical Issues Concerning the Motivation
and Performance of the Industrial
Salesforce,” in Gerald Albaum and Gilbert
A. Churchill (eds.), Critical Issues in Sales
Management: State of the Art and Future Research
Needs, Eugene, OR: University of Oregon,
10-75
Weitz, Barton A (1981), “Effectiveness in Sales
Interactions: A Contingency Framework,”
Journal of Marketing, 45,Winter, 85-103.
Wisner, Stanley D. (2001), “Service Quality
Along the Supply Chain: Implications for
Purchasing,” Journal of Operations Management,
19, 3, 287-3-6.
Wotruba, Thomas R. (1996), “The
Transformation of Industrial Selling: Causes
and Consequences,” Industrial Marketing
Management, 25, 327-338.
Northern Illinois University
Fall 2009 65
Academic Article
Appendix
Correlations of Constructs (N = 419)
Mean/
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
(S.D)
1. ADAPTS
5.16
.86
(1.13)
2. CO
.
6.06
.56
(.98)
3. ILPS
.
5.61
(1.02)
.
4. SALCONS 4.55
(1.10)
5. CONSEFF 4.90
(1.17)
6. RETENTION
(1.27)
7. PERCENT 7.06
QUOTA
(2.65)
.93
***
.47
.64
***
***
.32
.33
.45
***
***
***
.36
.43
.53
.46
***
***
***
***
.34
.40
.48
.40
***
***
***
***
***
.22
.29
.34
.24
.32
.36
***
***
***
***
***
***
5.27
.87
.73
.83
.47
Note: 1) * = p < .05; ** = p< .01; *** = p< .001
Vol. 9, No. 4
66
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
How to Minimize Realignment Issues: A Case Study
By Chuck Howlett
The goal of this paper is to discuss the impact that addressing team dynamics before structural logistics
may have in a realignment process. Specifically, it will examine accountability that representatives take
for their territory, product knowledge, selling activities and sales performance.
The paper will also highlight numerous team building, team dynamics and leadership techniques to
complement individual employee’s strengths and motivators to understand the impact on management
effectiveness. All of this is done while creating a brand that unifies the new district to establish business
ownership for each representative (territory) while maintaining company values of integrity, excellence
and respect for people across the team.
INTRODUCTION
Selling in the US marketplace has been very
dynamic over the years. In fact, in a 22-year
sales career (4 years as salesperson and 18 years
of management experience) with one company,
there have been six geographical realignments,
over a dozen new product introductions and
responsibilities in eight different states. These
changes are essential if more value is to be
delivered to the customers. However, these same
value delivering changes can be extremely
disruptive on employee motivation, their
connection to the company and their
engagement in their new territory and district.
During the formation stages of any re-alignment,
a performance gap consistently emerges which
predicts the sales performance for the next 12
months.
The question then is: “Can a sales manager have
a positive impact on future sales during the first
100 days of a re-alignment?” The objective of
this case study is to provide sales managers with
information on how one approach to
realignment can positively impact individual
salesperson and the new sales district. This can
then serve as a road map for other sales
managers to help them minimize disruption,
Northern Illinois University
engage every employee and use the inevitable
realignments as a springboard to establish a
performance culture that will thrive.
THE SITUATION
In January 2010 company realignment forced a
major change in geography, direct reports and, of
course, the customer data base. The previous
four years the district covered the NW corner of
Illinois (Rockford District included the Illinois
towns of McHenry, Plainfield, Moline, and
Galena).
In the 2010 realignment, the new district
contained less than 20 percent of the old
alignment. The new district, Chicago South,
included the area from DeKalb, IL, to Michigan
Avenue in downtown Chicago, south to
Kankakee then west to Dwight, IL. This new
district contained 10 new direct reports of the
14 total sales representatives. The fourteen
individuals are of varying ages and experiences
from four different districts (and management
styles). Four of the 14 came from the previous
district and two others representatives had
previously been part of the district prior to a
previous alignment change. Thus less than half
of the new district had any previous work
Application Article
experiences with their new manager.
Additionally, this team was sole owners of a
specific geography and not aligned with a
partner to allow specialization of skills or styles
to meet the unique customer needs. Now there
will be one representative for one territory.
Thus, the new team consisted of nine general
representatives and five specialty
representatives.
The new team representatives ranged from 25 to
47 years old with an average age of 34. The
experience level within averaged seven years and
ranged from two to 21 years of service. Job
levels for sales careers are distinguished in five
levels (S1 to S5). Representatives are promoted
to higher levels based on consistent
performance and leadership over time. The new
district has seven S2, six S3 and one S5
representatives. In their careers, three
representatives have been eligible for the top
sales award, President’s Council, but only one
has been selected by management.
Education accomplishments revealed diverse
undergraduate degrees across the team and three
having completed MBAs. There were three
minority individuals on the team. The gender
make up was eight women, six men with marital
status of nine single representatives and five
married; three with children.
The primary goal of most territory realignment
processes is to improve efficiency that leads to
improved performance.
The unintended
consequences that follow realignments,
however, may have significant impact on
performance. This case study focuses on these
secondary consequences first by emphasizing
personal accountability in each district member
as part of a team, developing each salesperson
based on their needs and finally focusing on
performance of each sales representative that
Fall 2009
67
comprise the district.
IMPLEMENTATION: A DIFFERENT
REALIGNMENT PROCESS
The company realignment was completed in late
2009 (for execution on January 1, 2010) and
provided a “customer centric” model working
toward enhancing the value provided to
customers. Any realignment, no matter how
small, can be disruptive to the customerrepresentative continuity as well as to a sales
team. While customer interactions are a journey
of its’ own, the disruption of sales
representatives and the rebuilding of a team in
this case is the first priority.
1. Assemble the New District Representatives
2. Develop a Team Building Strategy
3. Team Interactions to Allow Connections
4. .Develop Internal Structure and Process
5. Accountability for Results
Step One: The New Team
What needs to happen is to combine 14
strangers with a common purpose of
performance and utilize their strengths to form
something greater than the sum of their parts.
The goal is to have these individuals desire to be
part of this team versus merely doing a job. That
would require that each person trust and respect
each other while doing everything to help the
others.
What could hinder this team’s development?
The marketplace is relentless, competition is
fierce and customers are demanding value. Our
customers will not give us time for handholding
for team dynamics development. The company
will not tell us to “take your time for the first six
months and get to know all your teammates”.
They want to maximize shareholder value and
Vol. 9, No. 4
68
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
that starts January 1, 2010.
When developing a new district, one of the first
tasks is to ask each of the new direct reports to
do a preliminary SWOT (strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities, threats) analysis of their new
geography. This is not an unusual request but in
this case since only 20% of the customer base
was know by the new representative, it forced
inter representative communication to
accomplish the task.
Actions
This began with an introduction conference call,
December 4, 2009. In this call each person
introduced themselves and highlighted their
work history, family, college, and favorite holiday
memory. This was followed by the manager’s
expectations of the team and guidelines for
engagement. Then each representative was given
an assignment regarding personal style
assessment. This included Strengths Finders
completed via website, motivators worksheet and
preliminary assessment of team strengths and
opportunities.
The next event was a district “after work” event
in mid-December for everyone to meet face to
face. This was a differential advantage over
other districts due to our location and was a way
to begin to develop team dynamics before the
kick off meeting in January 2010. From face to
face meetings with previous district managers, a
better understanding of unique strengths and
weaknesses of each individual was gathered. In
addition, highlights of 2009 results and
leadership potential for each individual was
obtained.
Following the holiday break, corporate-driven
strategy meetings were scheduled for early
January. Set agendas usually include product
strategy and implementation expectations, a
practical selling skills workshop and time for
team building. Our district met in Naperville, IL
with another Chicago district to assist in the
Northern Illinois University
transition of customer experience between the
new territories.
These meetings provided a
chance to reconnect with old team members and
a springboard into understanding the strengths
of the new district. A critical aspect of these
meetings was the mutual understanding of
leadership principles, Chicago South 2010 vision,
administrative expectations, and the rules of
engagement.
District meetings occur quarterly and are a great
opportunity for role play practicing and
implementation alignment. To encourage more
frequent interactions among the team, shorter
monthly meetings were planned and executed to
complement the corporate and district meeting
cycle. The intent is to drive connections, build
trust across all representatives and engage the
leadership, business ownership and creativity of
all members.
Beginning with the February session, one
representative facilitated the review of Five
Dysfunctions of a Team. During this exercise,
representatives rated the team on principles from
the book. This provided for a discussion on
actions that can be taken to be a better team. In
addition comments from one day of field
observation for each representative were
provided by the new sales manager. Together
these provided team direction on notable
strengths and possible gaps.
Finally, the district capitalized on the relationship
with Northern Illinois University’s Professional
Sales Program when three representatives and
the manager attended a presentation by Jerry
Acuff which focused on his pharmaceutical
selling experiences via his book, The Relationship
Edge in Business. His insights were shared at the
March district meeting and representatives
requested a review the book at the June district
meeting. Acuff revealed that the key to strategic
influence and selling success is in the
Application Article
relationships with customers. While not rocket
science, it is a fundamental to increasing value to
the customers.
Impact
Through these preliminary actions, teammates
were able to gain insight on each other, identify
common backgrounds and interests and observe
the sales manager modeling the behavior that
was expected: real conversation, the ability to
balance work and life and no hidden agendas
The Strengths Finder assessment of each new
representative, found in the book Now, Discover
Your Strengths, provided an overview of the new
team. The book postulates that when you
concentrate development on an individual’s
strength (rather than a weakness), more total
growth happens for that individual.
The results of the survey provided each person
with their top five strengths from a potential 34
specific themes. While everyone has a unique
profile, the team composite snapshot found 10
individuals with an “achiever” theme. This was
fortunate in that research has indicated that for
the team to grow the fastest, the “achiever”
theme has drive. This person, or team, has a
constant need for achievement and that every
day starts at zero and something tangible must
be accomplished in order to feel good about
them. This internal fire pushes the person for
achievement.
The other team top strengths were
“competition” and “positivity”. Both of these
themes use performance as the unit of
measurement and must have comparisons. The
competition theme shows that if you can
compare, you can compete; and if you can
compete, you can win. The positivity theme
indicates that we are generous with praise, quick
to smile and looking for the positive in
situations.
By balancing the tenacity of
competition and achiever strengths with the high
Fall 2009
69
level of positive energy, the team dynamic
appears to have huge upside potential if it can be
aligned, framed and coached toward this
potential.
To complement the Strengths Finder, each
member completed a personnel survey
highlighting their hobbies, why they chose their
career, what would they like to change about the
job, characteristics of their best and worst
managers and how they liked to be coached. In
addition, the representatives ranked 12 unique
areas that each representative found important.
These areas included:
1. money
2. recognition from management
3. job security
4. being trusted
5. a sense of belonging
6. opportunity for promotion
7. opportunity for travel
8. challenging work
9. pleasant work environment
10. interesting work
11. loyalty from management
12. opportunity to learn
Teams will achieve top performance only if all
individuals are working at their highest and are
engaged in what they do. The surveys showed
those characteristics that each representative
value in their career and life while establishing a
road map for individual coaching. The district
overall, noted “money” as the top motivator
while “being trusted” and “loyalty” were the also
selected characteristics from the group. These
data helped form an individual coaching plan of
Vol. 9, No. 4
70
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
how to coach for top performance. Finally, the
plan was enhanced with recent performance
management documents and verified with
previous managers’ behavioral observations.
Going into 2010 and the “launch” of the new
district, the team building strategy was built
around each individual.
Step Two: Development of a Team Building
Strategy
Developing a Team Strategy was accomplished
by dividing the 14 sales representatives into
smaller units (pods) which resulted in three pods
(City, Suburb and Specialty). Each of the pods
then assigned an individual to be a product
expert for the pod (on the currently marketed
products).
Impact
Individuals that meet face-to-face built
connections and common interests quicker than
those that were limited by telephone or email (or
even texting with a photo attachment). Because
the new district was geographically smaller than
others in the country, this provided a differential
advantage for Chicago South District.
Next, to promote ownership, each representative
named their territory to highlight the uniqueness,
grow their sense of ownership and to have a little
fun. The overarching goal was to seek consistent
district expectations in order to promote strategy
execution across the entire team (calls,
frequency, programming) while allowing each
individual owner to make decisions to maximize
results. The team took it to heart with territory
names reflecting geography, personal interests
and customer dynamics. Some examples
included: Jersey Shore, The Appointment, The
Hub, Southside and Money Pit. These 14
territories now make up the Chicago South
District, renamed the Franchise.
Northern Illinois University
Step Three: Team Interactions
This step was to provide support and assistance
by sharing product information between pods.
Thus, the product expert for one pod would
communicate with the same product expert in
the other two pods. In this way ideas were
shared to obtain best practices information to
assist in developing the best marketing plan for
each product. This provided consistency and
allowed for some creativity.
Impact
At the April and July district meetings, a follow
up survey of the Five Dysfunction’s team
principles revealed some progress had been
made:
February
April
July
Absence of Trust
C-
B
B (3 A’s)
Fear of Conflict
C+
B
B (3A’s)
Lack of
Commitment
C
B
A-
Avoidance of
Accountability
C
B
B+
Inattention to
Results
C+
B+
A
The greatest improvement areas were in “lack of
commitment” and “inattention to results”, areas
that can cripple any district. Observing this
growth has been refreshing yet challenging to
continue the trends. I have worked through a
sales representative team member and she has
taken responsibility to drive the improvement.
Application Article
After the July meeting, she provided the team
the report card and coaching:
“The team seems to agree that overall all are committed
and focused on results to drive for an achievement trip as
a district. One area that was flat is “fear of conflict”.
Conflict is a part of a good team and knowing when and
how to call people out is a good thing. Some team
members may want to be held accountable publically while
others prefer one on one phone call. Bottom line, from the
survey, ALL feel conflict is necessary and do NOT want
to hold it back, but knowledge of how to approach each
member is critical”. The team dynamics are growing
with individuality, personality and some
vulnerability which will lead to growth.
Step Four: Developing Internal Structure and
Process
This step was needed to assist each pod in their
ability to communicate with each other. In most
cases when realignment occurs, each salesperson
is so busy trying to make an impact in the new
territory that little time is left to communicate
with other members of the district (lone ranger
syndrome). This step was to provide structured
time for each product expert in each group to
meet with the other pod product experts.
The time frame along with the purpose of the
meeting is listed below:
•
February
SWOT of territory
•
March
Specific product 1 targeting,
resources, action plan
•
April
50
•
May
State of the District
presentations (Hits/misses of sales results,
Implementation and targeting, Leadership
impact for pod, district Product action plan
FQ310, Expected YTD results, Peer
feedback with selection of top plan)
Specific product 2 tracking top
Fall 2009
71
Impact
Business ownership of individual territories
(while being part of a larger unit) is addressed
through naming the district, “Franchise”, and
each individual territory being named. This
name reinforces consistency of expectations,
results, and integrity while allowing individuals
opportunity to make their own decisions of
resource utilization, targeting, and message
priorities.
Product leaders were identified and expectations
were set and reviewed. Each representative was
provided leadership opportunities to assist in
implementation of brand strategy across the
district. Representatives are asked for their
interest in product teams and other leadership
positions and 12 of 14 representatives were
accommodated with their first or second choice.
Step Five: Accountability for Results
This is the final step in preparing the new district
for success. Each representative presented their
business plans to their pod teams, district
manager, and sales trainer. This presentation
required each team member to evaluate
implementation plans and provide written
feedback on analysis, content and the plan.
Impact
Confusion with new alignments and territories
was absent with this structure and a desire to
start strong in the team. This structure forced
communications between new teammates
around product knowledge, business ownership,
and implementation. Thus the representatives
forgot about the company-driven chaos and
turned to putting their territory back into order.
Observations and implementation from the three
pods varied with the completeness of SWOT
analyses, speed of execution, team dynamics and
candor among teammates. The district mantra
was focused on winning in the marketplace. In
our industry, the true value is providing
Vol. 9, No. 4
72
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
information and products to help customers.
However, every salesperson is driven by
competition and reaping the rewards of respect
and performance.
Representatives started to combine projects and
programs in order to stretch budget in the
Suburb pod. They quickly sensed that a local
expert would have an impact across each of their
territories, provide less risk of program
cancellations and help foster the customer
networks across the western suburbs. Plus they
could participate in the bigger event when a
territory specific intervention was not cost
justified. Additionally, this team quickly adapted
best practices observed in the discussion of
strategy, business acumen and implementation.
By the March meeting, one representative
proactively distributed an agenda and requested
information at the pod meeting.
In the Specialty pod, customer location
limitations forced two monthly meetings to a
collaboration site conference call. This use of
technology reduced the time investment to 45
minutes versus the three hour travel time
necessary for 40 % of the team. Even with this
time efficiency, team connection of these five
representatives (from districts) slowed versus the
two general pods. To complement the team
dynamics, the area director facilitated two face-to
-face meetings with the entire Specialty sales
team (22 representatives from five states) in
March and April. This intervention played into
the development of the team and brought the
five teammates together in their execution of the
area sales strategy. Additionally, the area meeting
clarified the role each representative had within
the Specialty pod and solidified the role of
candor among the team.
In the City pod, two of the four had completely
new geographies and saw the new territory as a
challenge to master.
In the first several
Northern Illinois University
meetings, locations presented suboptimal
conditions to discuss business and time of day to
conduct business conflicted among territories.
At the same time, the two new territories were
located at least an hour away from any city
meeting site and held a trade off - meeting versus
selling. During the first two meetings, the
majority of the dialogue was “reporting in” on
each individual territory and sharing customer
information/transition. Observations from both
the City pod and with three Specialty territories,
revolves around the small impact of a vast
number of customers.
This will deserve
additional research during the second half of
2010. As for the City team, logistics don’t allow
joint programming but the shear opportunities
for team brainstorming may align and combine
this group for long term performance.
At the May business plan review of each pod, a
new opportunity was provided that would
increase the possibility of candor in business
ownership while enhancing trust, force analysis
of each territory and benchmark those skills with
other representatives. For this meeting, each
presentation was limited to 30 minutes with an
assigned agenda. Additionally, the area sales
trainer was present to reduce bias and provide
her in-depth analysis of the data. Finally, written
peer feedback on each “State of the Territory”
was utilized for determining the top plan and
identifying best practices.
Feedback from representatives indicated that the
published data was more efficient (less time
consuming), offered a fresh insight of customer
investments (calls, frequency, messages,
programs, samples) and made them think more
strategically of their own territory franchises.
But like all good things, habits take time and
repetition to form effectiveness. The top three
plans (one from each pod) will also be
showcased at an upcoming district meeting to
Application Article
show “what good looks like” and raise the level of
analysis and planning
RESULTS
The consistent implementation and first quarter
sales results rank the district in the top 15 percent
across the country. Implementation (e.g., calls,
frequency, and messages) was slow into early
February, but has consistently been above
expectations for all parameters measured by
management since then and leads the Midwest
Area.
Some territory plans were streamlined into an
updated SWOT analysis followed by two pages of
an executive summary that were handed out to be
reviewed by the pod. Other updates were
available only by presentation format, while some
were small binders of data to support the action
plan. Regardless of style, the “the bar has been
raised”. Specific customers that influence specific
products were interwoven with quantity of
interactions (calls, frequency) and interventions
(programs, lunch or breakfast dialogues) to
determine if actions had impacted the business.
Further, a clear plan for top performance for the
rest of 2010 was developed for every territory.
Business owners are emerging across the district!
At the July session, the final piece of the team
development puzzle was presented and discussed,
accountability. Yes, accountability had previously
been addressed but in the Oz Principle review led
by two district MVPs, however, accountability was
“double clicked” and brought to life. It spoke of
seeing a problem, owning it as your own, solving
the riddle of what needed to get done, then doing
it! As owners of each territory, this mentality must
become part of the culture.
The company has been occupied tracking calls per
day, frequency of contacts over a rolling three
month period, programs and the size of customers
attending events. Other measures include quantity
of product dialogues with the top 50 customers
Fall 2009
73
for each product, budget compliance and the
quantity of samples utilized with all customers.
Finally, customers are now being asked to rate our
company in three distinct areas compared to the
competition. Bottom line: A lot of things to
evaluate monthly in order to modify and maximize
the value to the customer which will drive sales.
Customer Comments
The first set of data was collected January thru
March with customers in the five-state area
ranking the company above the competitors in
trust, satisfaction of delivering value to their
practice and engaging them in a manner to help
achieve better outcomes
District Results
Since February, the team has exceeded company
expectations on calls per day, frequency of contact
and programs. In fact in the first 100 days an the
eight district area, Chicago South is the leader in
calls, frequency, programs, and targeted physicians
attending programs and with appropriate dialogues
with top customers for every product. That
means the district is the benchmark for
implementation.
SALES PERFORMANCE
With the quick pace of the change and the
increasing complexities of selling, the year is far
from over. Five months of sales data have been
collected and the district is exceeding quota and
is ranked in the top 10% of districts in the US.
That means the customer surveys,
implementation data and sales results are
providing a scorecard that supports a successful
process.
Chuck. Howlett is District Sales Manager—
Chicago, IL area
Phone: (630) 461-3242
Vol. 9, No. 4
74
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
REFERENCES
Acuff, Jerry with Wally Wood (2007), The
Relationship Edge in Business, Hoboken, NJ,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Buckingham, Marcus and Donald O. Clifton, Ph.
D (2001) Now Discover Your Strengths, New
York, NY, The Free Press.
Conners, Roger, Tom Smith, Craig Hickman
(2004), The Oz Principle, New York, NY,
Penguin Group.
Griffin, Natalie Shope (2003), "Personalize Your
Management Development," Harvard Business
Review, March, pages 3-8.
Kim, W. Chan and Renee Mauborne (2003),
"Tipping Point Leadership," Harvard Business
Review, April, pages 3-11.
Lencioni, Patrick (2002), The Five Dysfunctions of a
Team, San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass.
Northern Illinois University