By representing their companies to customers

By representing their companies to customers - By...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
By representing their companies to customers, sales personnel play a critical role in ensuring their companies' success in building relationships and operating profitably (Weitz and Bradford 1999). Since sales representatives may engage in dysfunctional behaviors that can negatively affect a company, Supervisory Control Systems Sales force control systems involve the procedures that sales organizations use to monitor, direct, evaluate, and control the sales force. Anderson and Oliver (1987) suggest that supervisory control systems are either behavior-oriented (i.e., focused on salesperson behaviors) or outcome-oriented (i.e., focused on salesperson outcomes or results), thus proposing these as contrary views of a single construct. A behavior- orientation focuses on activities leading up to the sale, and is similar to the educational field's construct of learning orientation in which students are focused on developing their competencies of various concepts and ideas. In the same way, outcome-orientation parallels education's results-orientation, where the emphasis is on student grades/test results. Education scholars provide evidence that behavior-orientation is not simply opposite outcome-orientation by reporting a positive correlation between learning- and results-orientations (Meece, Blumenfeld, and Hoyle 1988). Ames and Archer (1988) prompt us to question the continuum view of behavior- and outcome-orientation by reporting no significant relationship between the two, suggesting that a behavior- or learning-orientation is not on the same continuum as an outcome- or results-orientation. Research suggests that the control process is more complex than the behavior-outcome continuum, as evidenced by mixed results reported in the literature (cf. Cravens et al. 1993; Jaworski, Stathakopoulos, and Krishnan 1993; Lusch and Jaworski 1991; Oliver and Anderson 1994; see Appendix A). For example, Cravens et al.'s (1993) research suggests outcome-focused controls (higher incentive compensation) are not positively related to selling performance. Conversely, Jaworski, Stathakopoulos, and Krishnan (1993) find that supervisory output controls positively affect a sales representative's performance orientation, which, in turn, positively affects selling performance. Recognizing the ambiguous findings in the literature, Challagalla and Shervani (1996) test a framework of three supervisory controls (outcome control, activity control, and capability control) and three control activities or levers (rewards, punishments, and information), where activity control and capability control comprise the earlier construct of behavior control.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Challagalla and Shervani's (1996) framework defines the three control dimensions and activities. Output control focuses on any discrepancies that exist between a salesperson's objectives and his or her actual sales results. Presumably, this control leads to greater accuracy in understanding the salesperson's goals to be attained (Jaworski and Kohli 1991). Supervisors can use rewards, punishments, or information
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 01/27/2011 for the course MGT 330 taught by Professor Debbieharris during the Spring '10 term at Ashford University.

Page1 / 16

By representing their companies to customers - By...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online