Personal Selling: The Relationship Between Selling Ability and Sales Performance

INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films
the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of
computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations
and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted.
Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing
from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy.
Higher quality 6 x 9 black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing

in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
ProQuest Information and Learning

300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA
800-521-0600
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
G ndutt Scfeool Fans 9

(ttm m il/H )
PURDUE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE SCHOOL
Thesis Acceptance
This is to certify that the thesis prepared
B y_____________________ X ian g Yuan Zhong
Entitled
PERSONAL SELLING:
THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN SELLING ABILITY AND SALES PERFORMANCE
Complies with University regulations and meets the standards of the Graduate School for originality
and quality
For the degree of
D o c to r o f P h ilo s o p h y
Signed bvihe final examini
Approved by:
Department Head
Doe
CD is
This thesis
not to be regarded as confidential.

Major Professor
Format Approved by:
Chair, Fioil
Adviser/
PERSONAL SELLING: THE RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN SELLING ABILITY AND SALES PERFORMANCE
A Thesis
Submitted to the Faculty
of
Purdue University
by
Xiang Yuan Zhong
In Partial Fulfillment o f the

Requirements for the Degree
of
Doctor o f Philosophy
May 2001
UMI Number. 3037674
UMI*
UMI Microform 3037674
Copyright 2002 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company

300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First o f all, I would not be able to complete this five-year long project without
help from many people. I would like to thank everyone for their patience and persistence
with me throughout the long-distance communications with emails, phone calls, etc. It
has not been easy for myself, and, o f course, for everyone who has helped me reach this
milestone.
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Richard Feinberg, my major
professor, for his guidance and support throughout my dissertation research. Without his
encouragement and caring, it would have been impossible for me to complete this project.
I am mostly grateful to Dr. Lucette Comer, who gave me numerous versions o f comments
and kept me on track. I also greatly appreciate the guidance and help from my two other
committee members: Dr. James Binkley and Dr. Tanya Drollinger.
Special thanks are extended to Mrs. Jeannie Navarre, the head secretary, for her
support and co-ordinations throughout this project.
I would like to thank my husband, Jiyin, for his loving and encouragement. Our
two children: 7-year old Nicholas and 3-year old Jessica, deserve special thanks for
having the best behavior whenever their mom needs to get on the computer and work on
her dissertation. I would also like to thank my parents, who helped us take care o f the
children from time to time, and their support, encouragement, and caring throughout the
process.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES...........................................................................................................
LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................................................................
vii
ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................
viii
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION................................................................................
Purpose o f the Study...........................................................................................

Contributions to Consumer Economics Research............................................
Contributions to Personal Selling Literature....................................................
Organization o f this Study.................................................................................
5
5
7
8
CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW.....................................................................
Sales Performance..............................................................................................
Selling Abilities..................................................................................................
Adaptability............................................................................................
K now ledge.............................................................................................
Presentation S k ills.................................................................................
Listening Skills .....................................................................................
Questioning S k ills .................................................................................
Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses.........................................................
Other Influencing Factors .................................................................................
G ender....................................................................................................
A g e .........................................................................................................
Education and Job T enure....................................................................
9
11
13
17
18
19
21
22
24
25
26
26
CHAPTER 3 - M ETHODOLOGY...............................................................................
28
Data C ollection..................................................................................................
Dependent V ariables.............................................................................
Self-Ratings...............................................................................
Quota A ttainm ent.....................................................................
Independent V ariables..........................................................................
A daptability...............................................................................
28
29
29
31
31
32
IV
CHAPTER 3 - METHODOLOGY, continued
Page
Product Knowledge...............................................................................
Presentation S k ills.................................................................................
Listening Skills ......................................................................................
Questioning S k ills.................................................................................
Statistical A nalysis.............................................................................................
Review o f Multiple Regression Models ..........................................................
34
34
37
38
38
42
CHAPTER 4 - RESULTS AND DISCUSSION..........................................................
44
Sample Characteristics.......................................................................................
Analysis o f Dependent V ariables......................................................................
Self-Reported Sales Perform ance........................................................
Quota A ttainm ent..................................................................................
Analysis o f Independent Variables ..................................................................
Adaptability S c a le .................................................................................
Product Knowledge S c a le ....................................................................
Presentation Skills S c a le .......................................................................
Listening Skills S cale............................................................................
Questioning Skills S c a le .......................................................................
Multiple Regression Analyses ..........................................................................
Composite Scale o f Independent Variables ........................................
At the Factor Level ...............................................................................
Influences o f Demographic Variables..............................................................
44
45
45
46
47
47
49
49
51
52
56
56
58
60
CHAPTER 5 - CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS..........................................
62
Implications for Practitioners............................................................................

Implications and Future R esearch....................................................................
Overall Conclusion ............................................................................................
66
67
68
LIST OF REFEREN CES...............................................................................................
69
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................
78
Appendix A. I
Appendix A.2
Appendix A.3
Appendix A.4
Appendix A.5
Cover L etter..............................................................................
Sales Representatives Questionnaire ....................................
Review o f Sales Performance M easu res...............................
Review o f Adaptability M easures..........................................
Review o f Listening Skill Measures ......................................
78
79
84
89
91
V IT A ................................................................................................................................
95
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1.1
Page
Sales Force Size Change o f Five Major Pharmaceutical
Companies ..................................................................................................
2.1
Importance o f Types o f Selling A bility......................................................
12
2.2
Situations Under Which Adaptability is Important...................................
15
3.1
Measures o f Variables .................................................................................
32
3.2
Content Analysis on Items from the Knowledge Scale
...............
35
3.3
Content Analysis on Items from the Presentation Skills S c a le ...............
36
3.4
Content Analysis on Items from the Questioning Skills S c a le ...............
39
4.1
Sample Characteristics.................................................................................
44
4.2
Factor Analysis o f Self-Rating Performance S cale..................................
45
4.3
Factor Analysis o f Adaptability Scale ......................................................
48
4.4
Factor Analysis o f Product Knowledge S cale...........................................
50
4.5
Factor Analysis o f Presentation Skills Scale ............................................
53
4.6
Factor Analysis o f Listening Skills S c a le .................................................
54
4.7
Listening Scale: Comparison with Ramsey and Sohis Results .............
55
4.8
Factor Analysis o f Questioning Skills S cale.............................................
56
4.9
Multiple Regression Results o f All Independent V ariables.....................
57
vi
Table
Page
4.10
Multiple Regression Results o f All F acto rs..............................................
60
4 .11
Influences o f Demographic Variables........................................................
61
A.1
Comparison o f Measures in Sales Performance .......................................
88
A.2
Comparison o f Listening T e s ts ..................................................................
93
Appendix
Table
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
2.1
Page
ConceptualFramework...............................................................................
24
ABSTRACT
Zhong, Xiang Yuan. Ph.D., Purdue University, May 2001. Personal Selling: The
Relationship between Selling Ability and Sales Performance. Major Professor: Richard
Feinberg.
This study attempted to assess a very basic yet still unresolved relationship
between personal sales representatives and sales effectiveness. Using the arena o f
pharmaceutical sales this study asks the essential question, are personal sales
representatives effective in increasing sales? What is the relationship between selling
ability and the performance effectiveness o f salespeople in the pharmaceutical sales
context? Based on past research that defined the factors o f selling ability this study
looked into the five most important selling abilities: adaptability, product knowledge,
listening skills, presentation skills, and questioning skills.
A survey o f salesperson's self-ratings on selling abilities and sales performance
was administered. A random sample o f 1,500 sales representatives was selected from a
large international pharmaceutical company's total 3,000 representative's sales force. In
addition, quota attainment was obtained for an objective measurement. A total o f 547
usable questionnaires were returned for a response rate o f 36%, a relatively high response
rate.
The findings from this study provided insights into several areas. First, this study
showed a high correspondence between self and objective assessment o f selling ability.
Based on the findings from this study, these two measures appear to be highly correlated.
It appears that the self-reported performance does reflect the actual quota attainment.
While an overall relationship between selling ability and performance was found
this study also shows clearly that selling ability consists o f differing components and
these components may or may not be determinants in performance. The following
dimensions o f selling ability were found to be significantly related to sales performance:
Adaptive selling behaviors, product knowledge, responding dimension o f listening skills,
and basic presentation skills.
This study did not show any positive relationship between adaptive selling beliefs,
sensing/evaluating dimensions o f listening skills, interactive presentation skills and sales
performance. This could mean that these skills are simply not as important as past
research and thinking imply. It could also mean that there is something unique about the
pharmaceutical sales situation (very short) that makes use and effectiveness o f these skills
to be minimal. Both are interesting possibilities for future research.
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
Personal selling is o f primary importance to the success o f most businesses.

Nothing happens until somebody sells something. Todays salespeople are responsible
for generating more revenue in our economy than workers in any other profession
because they have a direct impact on the introduction o f new products to markets and the
development o f markets for existing products (Futrell, 1995).
Personal selling is defined as "direct communications between paid
representatives and prospects that lead to purchase orders, customer satisfaction, and
post-sale service (Dalrymple & Cron, 1995). The need for personal selling appears even
greater today in our high tech business world. There are thousands o f new products
available every year. As products become more complex and faster to market the
personal assistance provided by a well-trained salesperson is more important than ever.
With advertising, publicity, and promotions, personal selling is part o f a wellrounded marketing effort (Manning & Reese, 1995). Compared to other promotional
tools, personal selling has the advantage o f more flexibility in operation. Sales
representatives can tailor their sales presentations to fit the needs and behavior of
individual customers. They can see the customers reaction to a particular sales approach
and then make the necessary adjustments. Because personal selling focuses on specific
prospective customers, there is less wasted effort. By contrast, in most forms of
advertising, much o f the cost is devoted to sending the message to people who are not real
prospects. In personal selling, a company has an opportunity to pinpoint its target market
far more effectively than with any other promotional device. Advertisements can attract
attention and arouse desire, but they do not necessarily direct buying action or complete
the sale like personal selling does.
Given the importance o f personal selling it is somewhat surprising that there are
few conclusive studies documenting the effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) o f personal
selling efforts. This is despite the fact that many companies see the sales force as their
best promotional tool and a necessity (e.g., Futrell, 1995; Manning & Reese, 1995). This
study focuses on a very basic yet still unresolved relationship between personal sales
representatives and sales effectiveness. Using the arena o f pharmaceutical sales this
study asks the very basic question, are personal sales representatives effective in
increasing sales?
Pharmaceutical sales are a specialized type o f sales known as missionary sales'.
In missionary selling the focus is NOT on actually completing a sales transaction and
gaining a sale on the spot, but rather on promotional activities, introducing new products,
educating a constituent to recommend purchase, stimulating demand for the product and
developing on-going relationship with the clients. Pharmaceutical sales and educational
book representatives are two prime examples o f missionary sales positions (McCarthy &
Perreault, 1984; Moncrief, 1986).
The major responsibility o f pharmaceutical salespeople is to provide scientific
information to physicians. But from a companys perspective, the ultimate goal is not
only to provide information, but also to make a profit. The pharmaceutical salesperson
seeks to persuade doctors (the indirect customers) to specify a pharmaceutical companys
trade name products for prescriptions. The actual sale is ultimately made through a
wholesaler or is made directly to pharmacists and hospitals that fill prescriptions. A
missionary salesperson provides information about products to decision-makers, who in
turn recommend or sell the products to their customers. Pharmaceutical Sales
Representatives introduce physicians to new drugs and other pharmaceutical products in
the hope that the physicians will prescribe these products for their patients (McCarthy &
Perreauit, 1984; Moncrief, 1986).
Pharmaceutical sales representatives (PSRs) are the most direct points o f contact
with physicians. Their tasks are to meet with physicians, market their companies
products, and influence physicians to prescribe these products. Lexchin (1989) states that
pharmaceutical companies in industrialized countries view PSRs as the most important
promotional source for their products, and over 50 percent o f their promotional
expenditures are devoted to PSRs. The average annual cost o f recruiting, training, and
supporting a PSR is estimated to be SI 00,000 (Freiman, 1992). The importance o f PSRs
to sales organizations is supported by the growth o f the profession. From 1994 to 1997,
five of the largest U. S. pharmaceutical companies increased their sales forces
substantially. Table 1.1 shows the increases o f sales representatives for five major
pharmaceutical companies (Pharmaceutical Sales Force Structure & Strategies, 1997).
Table 1.1
Sales Force Size Change o f Five Major Pharmaceutical Companies
Company
Pfizer
Merck & Co
Glaxo Wellcome
Bristol-Myers Squibb
SmithKline Beecham
1994
2,204
2,553
2,358
2,539
1,820
1997
3,467
3,421
3,066
3,240
2,216
% Change
57%
34%
30%
28%
22%
Source: Pharmaceutical Sales Force Structure & Strategies (1997)
Given the expense o f PSRs to pharmaceutical companies, PSRs are expected to be

effective in influencing physicians and the sale o f pharmaceutical products
(Pharmaceutical Sales Force Structure & Strategies, 1997; Weilbaker, 1990). Simply
based on the costs of making a sale (expensive), one would expect that there has been a
lot o f research to study the effectiveness o f PSRs. However, this is not the case
(Weilbaker, 1990).
Although empirical research is lacking in the pharmaceutical sales context, the
perceived influence of PSRs has elicited much discussion. On the one hand there is
research which asserts PSRs to be wasteful and ineffective. Physicians have questioned
the practice o f pharmaceutical sales (Waud, 1992). On the other hand, others have
stressed the importance o f PSRs as a source o f information (Huston, 1993) given the
increasing complexity o f pharmaceutical products and the increasing number o f new
drugs. It was suggested that physicians need PSRs to leam (Ferguson, 1989). Thomas
(1989) and Andaleeb & Tallman (1995) found that hospital pharmacy directors viewed
the information provided about new products as the most useful service they received
from PSRs. Huston (1993) found that physicians ranked PSRs among the three most
useful sources o f information about pharmaceutical products.
Purpose o f the Study

The purpose o f this study is to examine the relationship between selling ability
and the performance effectiveness o f salespeople in the pharmaceutical sales context.
Contributions to Consumer Economics Research

Health care has become a dominant economic and political issue in the United
States (and in many other countries). The American health care system is a complex
mixture o f public and private sector activities. The governments part in directly and
indirectly delivering health services is quite large (for example, Medicare, Medicaid,
public hospitals). Most individuals and organizations that provide medical services are in
the private, nongovernmental sector (for example, doctors offices, hospitals, HMOs).
More than 60 percent of personal health services is privately financed, either through
employment-based health benefits or direct payment by the patient (Gray, 1991).
Expenditures on personal medical services have risen more rapidly than
expenditures on most other goods and services in the economy. Annual expenditures on
personal medical services have increased from S35.8 billion in 1965 to S371.4 billion in
1985 (Waldo, Levit, & Lazenby, 1986). In 1965,5.2 percent o f the gross national product
(GNP) was being spent on personal medical services. By 1985,9.3 percent o f the GNP
was being allocated to personal medical services (Waldo, Levit, & Lazenby, 1986). If the
rate o f increase in medical care expenditures continues to expand rapidly, personal
medical services will continue to consume an increasing portion o f all goods and services
produced in the United States.
With rapid increases in medical costs, the health care industry has come under
intense scrutiny. One player in this industry that seems to be getting a lot o f attention is
the pharmaceutical industry. A major reason for this attention is that pharmaceutical
products are still the single largest out-of-pocket health care expense for consumers
(Haas, 1994). Given the important role o f pharmaceutical products in health care
economics, it is, therefore, critical to understand the marketing and promotion process o f
pharmaceutical companies.
The effectiveness o f PSRs is sharply etched because marketing costs account for a
significant proportion o f the price o f pharmaceuticals. IMS America (1998) reports that
companies spending on promoting to physicians in the U. S. increased by 10% in 1997 to
S4 billion, accounting for 81% o f all promotional spending. That is an estimate o f $5,000
to S6,000 per physician per year. Since the consumer is the one ultimately paying for
these promotional efforts (it is embedded in the price we pay for drugs) the study o f the
factors determining effectiveness (and ineffectiveness) can help pharmaceutical
companies minimize inefficiencies eventually minimizing the passed on costs to
consumers.
Understanding the role that marketing forces (including PSRs) play in influencing
physician behavior is another interesting part o f the issue (Avom, Chen, & Hartley,
1982). Consumers (patients) rely on their physicians to make the right choice o f drugs.
Physicians are trusted to be knowledgeable about the development in their respective
therapeutic areas. They need to possess all relevant information to make the right
diagnosis for patients. PSRs educate physicians on hundreds o f drugs coming to the
market every year, in the hope that physicians will convey the drugs to patients the
ultimate consumers. The effectiveness o f the communication between PSRs and
physicians certainly affects both physicians and their patients the ultimate consumers.
The extreme end o f importance in understanding the dynamics o f the relationship
between PSR and physician is clearly illustrated in a study by Peltzman (1974). Peltzman
examined the consequences o f failure by physicians to adopt drugs due to a lack o f
information. He cites the case o f tuberculosis (TB), estimating that if the use o f TB drugs
had spread as rapidly as the Salk vaccine, 80,600 lives would have been saved. He also
suggests that if major tranquilizers had been more heavily promoted, this might have
resulted in savings o f 645 million patient days in the hospital.
Contributions to Personal Selling Literature

Selling ability received little scholarly attention before 1990 (Weilbaker, 1990).
Starting from 1990, there have been some studies investigating selling ability (Auglin,
Stoltman, & Gentry, 1990; Goolsby, Lagace & Boorom, 1992; O Hara, Boles, &
Johnston, 1991; Predmore & Bonnice, 1994; Spiro & Weitz, 1990). However, these
studies appear to be weak because:
1. The prior studies examine selling ability as a unitary concept although the
thinking in this area is that selling is a multidimensional construct.
2. The relationship between particular selling abilities and sales performance has
not been studied.
This study intends to fill in these gaps by examining the relationship between
multidimensional selling abilities and sales performance. The relationship between the
top five selling abilities, identified by Weilbaker (1990) and sales performance in
pharmaceutical sales will be studied. These five skills are adaptability, product
knowledge, presentation skills, listening skills, and questioning skills.
The relationships between specific selling abilities and sales performance will
provide insights into the management o f sales forces. Identification o f the determinant
selling skills can lead to effective training programs, more targeted selection o f
salespeople, greater organizational success, efficiency, and effectiveness.
Organization o f This Study

The organization o f this study is as follows. Chapter Two reviews the literature
pertinent to selling abilities and sales performance. A conceptual framework is presented.
Hypotheses to be tested are presented. In Chapter Three the research design and
procedures are set forth. The scales used in the current study are presented. Chapter Four
presents the results and findings. Finally, discussion and areas for future research and
implications from this study are outlined in Chapter Five.
CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW
Sales Performance
Sales performance should be and is one o f the key outcome factors in sales
research. There is a wealth o f conceptual and empirical work related to sales
performance (Churchill, Walker, Hartley, & Ford, 1985; Plank & Reid, 1994). However,
the findings of empirical research have often been mixed, and the predictive ability o f
past models has been weak. This may be in part due to the different nature o f the two
main forms of measuring sales performance.
The performance o f sales forces can be evaluated on behavior-based or outcomebased standards (Anderson & Oliver, 1987). In a behavior-based system, managers
monitor salesperson's selling activities closely, give them substantial direction, and
evaluate their efforts using multiple criteria. It appears that behavior-based systems are
most appropriate when responsibility for the selling process is difficult to assign, or when
non-selling activities are a key component o f the job. Behavior-based systems enable
sales managers to make recommendations about how salespersons allocate their time, and
resources. Sales managers can also ensure that salespersons perform their jobs
consistently with company policies. However, behavior-based system can be cost
intensive and difficult to administer.
10
An outcome based system focuses on final outcomes or results rather than the
component processes. Managers in outcome based system allow their salespeople to
perform their jobs in their own way, without specific direction as to how to perform the
jobs. Salespeople receive minimum direction. Essentially in an outcome-based system,
salespeople are assigned objectives, but left to develop their own methods o f achieving
them (Anderson & Oliver, 1987). Managers who supervise salespeople in outcome-based
system track salespeoples day-to-day results monitoring things such as sales volume and
degree o f quota attainment.
The evaluation o f salespeople also differs for behavior-based systems and
outcome-based systems. Salespeople operating in control systems that are behaviorbased are evaluated on the way they do their jobs. On the other hand, salespeople under
outcome-based systems are held accountable only for their results, not on how they
achieve the results (Anderson & Oliver, 1987).
In the pharmaceutical sales context, sales do not typically occur within the direct
interaction between physicians and sales representatives. Rather the main purpose o f the
visit from sales representatives is to build up brand loyalty to their company and products.
Pharmaceutical sales representatives visit physicians and spend 6 to 10 minutes with them
on each call (Scott-Levin, 1996). Their presentations include accurate information about
the symptoms for which a pharmaceutical is effective, how effective it is, and what side
effects might occur. Physicians consider these presentations an important source o f
information about new products. In return, physicians may prescribe companys brands.
When a patient fills a prescription, the company records a sale from a wholesaler or a
11
pharmacy. Therefore, the sales representative does not close a sale himselfTherself. The
information he or she brings to the physician is to help the physician make an informed
decision on which drug to prescribe. The objective o f the reps' visits is not to make a sale
at the spot, but to fulfill his or her call objectives with a sales occurring in some removed
future point. If a sales representative effectively communicates relevant scientific
information to a physician, the physician is expected to prescribe the companys brands
and a sale would occur. A sales representatives performance can be evaluated as a
function o f market sales rather than individual physician sales.
Because o f its objective nature, an outcome-based system will be used for the
current study to investigate the relationship between selling ability and performance:
1. Researchers have suggested that managers believe that sales performance can be
evaluated more objectively by an outcome-based system (Anderson & Oliver,
1987);
2. Most o f pharmaceutical companies use this system to evaluate and compensate
sales representatives (Feinstein, 1992). The use o f an objective based measure
mirrors the reality o f pharmaceutical sales than would the use o f other measures.
Selling Abilities
In order to study the determinants o f outcomes and to improve upon prior research
that has used global measures of sales behavior it is important to understand the
components o f effective selling.
The conceptual and operational definitions o f selling abilities used in the current
study are based on the research into the relationship between pharmaceutical salespeople's
12
abilities and their successfulness in sales interactions conducted by Weilbaker (1990).

Because o f the importance o f the Weilbaker's study, the following section is devoted to a
full discussion o f how Weilbaker derived the key selling abilities in his research.
Through interviews with salespeople, field sales managers and physicians,
fourteen selling abilities were identified as important for success in sales interactions.
Weilbaker ranked ordered these abilities in terms o f their ranked importance to the
various groups involved in pharmaceutical sales (salespeople, managers, and physicians).
The fourteen abilities were adaptability, knowledge, presentation skills, listening skills,
questioning skills, observational skills, confidence, organizational skill, enthusiasm,
empathy, handle rejection, creativity, perseverance, and likability.
Table 2.1 summarizes the ranking results from Weilbaker's study.
Table 2.1
Importance of Types o f Selling Ability
Abilities
Adaptability
Knowledge
Presentation Skills
Listening Skills
Questioning Skills
Observational Skills
Confidence
Organization Skills
Enthusiasm
Empathy
Handle Rejection
Creativity
Perseverance
Likability
Salespeople Managers Physicians Sum of Ranks

1
1
3
5
4
2
1
7
5
1
1
7
2
1
6
9
4
4
5
13
6
6
9
21
7
7
10
24
8
7
11
26
9
12
7
28
7
10
12
29
11
7
13
31
II
12
8
31
11
7
13
31
14
14
4
32
Source: Weilbaker (1990).
13
By summing across the perceived importance the top five selling skills were
(Table 2.1) adaptability, knowledge, presentation skills, listening skills, questioning
skills. The current study proposes to use these top ranked five abilities. If no
relationships are found using these top 5 it is unlikely that relationships exists with any of
the other component factors. Following is a review o f the previous studies, which have
examined these five abilities.
Adaptability
Adaptability in personal selling is the ability to change planned sales behaviors
(activities or messages) during or across customer interactions in order to respond to
circumstances that are different than what was expected (Weilbaker, 1990; Weitz, Sujan,
& Sujan, 1986). Adaptive salespeople alter their sales behaviors during a customer
interaction or across customer interactions based on perceived information about the
nature o f the selling situation. Work supporting this proposed relationship between
adaptive selling skills and sales performance has been conducted by Anglin, Stoltman and
Gentry (1990); Leong, Busch, and John (1989), Tanner (1994), and Predmore and
Bonnice (1994) and Weitz, (1981) and Weitz, Sujan & Sujan, (1986).
Despite the evidence from some o f the work cited above for a relationship
between adaptive selling skills and sales results, Pettijohn, Pettijohn, Parker, and Taylor
(1996) conducted a meta analysis across 40 studies and concluded that there was
insufficient evidence to show any overall positive relationship between adaptability and
performance.
14
Given the conflicting evidence about the effectiveness o f adaptive selling on sales
performance, researchers attempted to uncover the boundary conditions that define when
adaptive selling might be related to selling performance. Blackshear (1998) suggested
that part o f the inconsistent results from inadequate and inconsistent definitions o f
adaptive selling. Blackshear noted that positive findings appeared most likely when a
broad definition o f adaptive behaviors was used. Marks, Vorhies, and Badovick (1996)
proposed that the mixed results occurred because o f reliance on a measure o f adaptive
selling that was unidimensional. It may simply be that adaptive selling is dependent upon
the nature o f the selling situation (Giacobbe,1991; Spiro & Weitz, 1990).
Both Giacobbe (1991) and Blackshear (1998) suggested that the amount o f risk a
buyer perceives during a purchase might relate to adaptive selling behavior. Riskier
purchases may require a more adaptive selling orientation. Variety o f customers is
another area in which adaptability is very important. It is obvious that unique approaches
will help close a sale or facilitate a sale when each customer has his/her distinct
characteristics.
Product varieties may also have an influence on adaptive selling behavior, as
suggested both by Giacobbe ( 1991) and Blackshear (1998). The characteristics o f each
product may require a different approach for each product. Giacobbe (1991) suggested
that duration o f relationship might be an important factor in the need to practice adaptive
selling. The longer the relationship is, the more important adaptability is to the
salesperson. Apparently, repeated presentations have to be made for long-term selling
and modified presentations have to be used.
15
In addition, Giacobbe (1991) suggested that presence o f a buying center, dollar
value o f sale and complexity o f the offering are also important factors affecting adaptive
selling practices. Spiro and Weitz (1992) expanded the situations to companys resources
and salespeoples capacity. Consumer goods, as opposed to industrial goods, may require
different selling approaches. Table 2.2 summarizes the situations in which adaptability
may or may not be important from previous studies.
Table 2.2
Situations Under Which Adaptability is Important
Giacobbe (1991)
Spiro & Weitz (1992)
1. The buying center

2. Purchase risk
3. Dollar value o f sale
1. Large orders
4. Variety o f products
5. Duration o f relationship
6. Homogeneity o f customers needs 2. Variety o f customers
7. Complexity o f the offering
3. Companys resources
4. Salespeople's capacity
Blackshear (1998)
1. Amount o f risk
2. Type o f products
3. Interaction between salesperson
and customers
4. Consumer goods/industrial goods

Source: Blackshear (1998), Giacobbe (1991), Spiro & Weitz (1992)
Are these moderating factors relevant to pharmaceutical sales? Based on previous

studies, several factors previously found to be boundary conditions for performance
effects o f differing levels o f adaptive selling skills appear to be relevant to pharmaceutical
sales selling situation.
First, both Giacobbe (1991) and Blackshear (1998) emphasize that purchase risk
may relate to adaptability. In the pharmaceutical selling, the amount o f purchase risk is
16
high for "buyers" physicians and patients. Physicians have to be knowledgeable of

efficacy, safety, and side effects o f all products they prescribe for their patients. In order
to help physicians identify the right product to use, a salesperson will have to make
his/her selling as unique as possible.
Second, the duration o f relationship between the salesperson and customers has
been identified as an important factor for promoting adaptive selling. The longer the
relationship is, the more adaptive the salesperson needs to be. In pharmaceutical sales,
the relationship between the salesperson and a physician is long term and repeated
presentations are necessary. Frequent calls to a physician are essential to keep a
physician continuing to prescribe companys products. A non-adaptive sales presentation
will not be effective when a salesperson makes frequent calls on the same buyer.
Finally, PSRs face a high degree o f heterogeneity among customers. Great
differences exist from one physician to another. Physicians differ in geographic region
(e.g., urban-rural), size and type o f practice (large hospitals, group practice, or a solo
office), type o f patient (old, young, male, female), and disease state o f patients (severe,
mild). Therefore, pharmaceutical sales representatives have to be trained to adapt to the
exact nature o f their situation (Freiman, 1992).
In summary, adaptability is likely to be very important in pharmaceutical industry
selling. Based on a preponderance o f the evidence which suggests that PSRs face
differing sales conditions and environments PSRs adaptive selling ability should be
positively related to sales effectiveness.
17
Knowledge
Knowledge o f specific products/services is essential for personal selling because it
permits a salesperson to attach a specific set o f product/service solutions to specific
needs. A high degree o f knowledge also may have very positive side effects by helping
the salesperson build a positive self-image and feel thoroughly prepared to interact with
customers (e.g., Anderson, 1995; Futrell, 1992; Peterson, Wright, & Weitz, 1988). This
thinking has been supported by the research. Studies consistently show that more
effective salespeople have greater knowledge about their companys products (Smith &
Owens, 1995; Sujan, Sujan, & Bettman, 1988).
As product cycles shorten and technology advances salespeople are under pressure
to keep up to date. Todays pharmaceutical products are extremely complex. New drugs
come into the market every year. Diseases and their treatments are more complex. The
variety o f products and services available today is a challenge to consumers and
physicians and help is needed to make informed decisions. Professionally trained and
knowledgeable pharmaceutical sales representatives are the experts. They work with
physicians by demonstrating the efficacy, benefits, safety aspects, and side effects o f the
drug. They help physicians make decisions on which drug to prescribe for which type o f
patients that allows consumers (patients) to make informed decisions. The research that
supports this is clear. PSR's expertise is one that is the most trusted o f all information
sources available to the professional medical community (Andaleeb and Tallman, 1995;
Avon, Chen & Harley, 1982; Huston, 1993; Thomas, 1989).
18
In summary, salesperson knowledge has been found to have a significant impact

on sales performance. The more knowledgeable a salesperson is about his/her products,
the more successful he/she will be.
Presentation Skills
Personal selling is an example o f very individualized communication (Weitz,
Sujan, & Sujan, 1986). The ability o f the salesperson to use o f verbal and nonverbal
means to clearly convey the benefits o f their particular products/service in a sales
message is called presentation skills.
In pharmaceutical sales the presentation o f products/services are indirectly
regulated. The Food and Drug Administrations (FDA) has very restrictive regulations on
labeling (what indications a drug can be used for), sales aids, competitive claims and so
on. If any inappropriate promotional materials or claims are used by PSRs, FDA would
impose very severe penalties on corporations. PSR attempts to "sell" his or her
companys products has to meet the FDA regulations.
The restrictive environment in which presentation skills are displayed is one
reason why PSRs need well developed presentation skills. In addition, the need for
salespeople to have excellent presentation skills is highlighted by the short duration o f
most pharmaceutical sales (6-10 minutes) (Scott-Levin, 1996). In this short time the
pharmaceutical representative's sales presentation may have to show concrete facts about
product efficacy, benefits, safety and side effects. Given the relatively short time duration
o f interaction, the presentation has to be very concise and to the point. Good presentation
skills should lead to effectiveness.
19
Listening Skills
Listening in the personal sales context has been defined as the cognitive process
o f actively sensing, interpreting, evaluating, and responding to the verbal and nonverbal
messages o f present or potential customers (Castleberry & Shepherd, 1993; Steil, Barker,
& Watson, 1983). Good salespeople are good listeners. They ask questions, listen as
prospects answer to uncover their needs. Then they show how their products benefits
will fulfill these needs. The ability to identify and meet customer needs separates the
successful salesperson from the average salesperson (Oberhaus, Ratliffe, & Stauble,
1993). Indeed, Moore, Eckrich and Carlson (1986) reported in their study that industrial
salespeople rated listening as the most important skill needed to be successful. Ingram,
Schwepker, and Hutson (1992) found poor listening skills to be blamed as the most
important factor in contributing to salesperson failure.
Although researchers have suggested that there is a link between effective
listening, adaptive selling and sales performance (Castleberry & Shepherd, 1993), little
research has focused on effective listening skills in the personal selling context (Comer &
Drollinger, 1999). Only two empirical studies have examined the effectiveness of
listening (Boorom, 1994; Ramsey & Sohi, 1997).
Two frameworks have been proposed to understand this relationship (Castleberry
& Shepherd, 1993; Comer & Drollinger, 1999). Castleberry and Shepherd (1993)
proposed that listening has four dimensions: sensing, interpreting, evaluating, and
responding. In the sensing process, the salesperson receives all verbal and non-verbal
cues (words, inflection, body language, facial expressions) transmitted by others and must
20
be able to decode buyer nonverbal cues. Then the salesperson interprets the message and
compares incoming messages to those in memory. In the evaluating process, the listener
identifies the key elements of the messages and assesses the importance o f messages.
The listener decides whether to agree, or not to disagree with the message. The last
process is responding in verbal or non-verbal forms. In this process, the listener
acknowledges the occurrence o f listening and encourages communication to continue.
The response can be verbal feedback such as questioning or summarizing, or nonverbal
cues such as a smile or frown.
Comer and Drollinger (1999) merged the concepts o f active listening and
empathy. In their model, they combined interpreting and evaluating into one step and
added understanding and remembering to the listening dimension. They suggested that
salespeople with active empathetic listening would outperform those with weaker
listening.
The research that has been done in this area supports the conceptions discussed
above. Boorom (1994) examined listening and its interaction with adaptive selling and
reported a positive relationship. A study by Ramsey and Sohi (1997) surveyed a group o f
new car buyers to assess listening skills of salespeople. They found a strong, positive
correlation between salespeople listening and two constructs: trust in the salesperson, and
anticipation o f future interactions with that salesperson.
In a pharmaceutical sales environment the need to have good listening skills is
etched by the scientific nature o f the information given and the short time in which it
21
occurs. Based on previous research and conceptual thought listening skills o f

pharmaceutical reps are expected to be positively related to sales performance.
Questioning Skills
The importance o f probing for information, asking questions is well recognized in
selling textbooks (e.g., Oberhaus, Ratliffe, & Stauble, 1993; Pederson, Wright, & Weitz,
1988). There are three main reasons for questioning the customer (Oberhaus, Ratliffe, &
Stauble, 1993). They are: to gather information, to assess how a customer thinks or feels,
and to verify facts and attitudes discovered by other questions or data sources. In this
way salespeople are able to identify the customers obvious problems or needs and those
that are not always obvious (Weilbaker, 1990). Weitz (1978) found that sales
performance is related to the salespeoples ability to form accurate impression o f
customer beliefs and values and the degree to which they develop effective sales
strategies based on these impressions.
Questions persuade more powerfully than any other form o f verbal behavior.
There is a clear statistical association between the use o f questions and the success o f the
interaction. The more questions asked, the more successful the interaction is likely to be
(Schuster and Danes 1986).
The time pressure o f a pharmaceutical sales representative may not be the perfect
situation to use various types o f questioning techniques. Sales representatives have to be
skilled and ask the most appropriate questions to fit the pharmaceutical sales
environment. As a result good questioning technique may be very helpful.
22
Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses

To summarize the previous literature and illustrate the purpose o f the present
study, the following conceptual framework has been developed. The five selling abilities
that have been previously identified as top skills are believed to impact sales
performance. Although there is evidence that selling ability is related to performance
there is not strong evidence o f which o f the components o f the process are important.
Adaptive selling ability is the ability to change planned selling behavior in order
to respond to situations that are different than what was expected. A salesperson who is
able to react to the needs o f different customers across various sales situations will be
more successful than one who is less able to react. Therefore, a positive relationship is
expected between sales representatives adaptability and sales representative's
performance. The following hypothesis is proposed:
H I: There is a positive relationship between salespeoples adaptability and their
sales performance.
Second, product knowledge a salesperson possesses positively impacts a
salesperson's performance. A high degree o f product knowledge increases a salesperson's
confidence in selling and believing in his/her company's products. Customers will have
confidence and trust in a salesperson who is knowledgeable o f his/her companys
products and those of the competitors. Therefore the following preposition is stated:
H2: There is a positive relationship between salespeoples product knowledge
and their sales performance.
23
Sales presentation is one o f the important steps in personal selling. Presentation
skill is the use o f verbal and nonverbal means to clearly convey the content o f the sales
message. Good presentation skills should lead to sales effectiveness. Hypothesis three is
as follows:
H3: There is a positive relationship between salespeoples presentation skills and
their sales performance.
Effective listening skills are essential to personal selling. Good salespeople are
good listeners. Listening skills can be effectively used to gather information about the
customers. The ability to identify and meet customer needs separates the successful
salesperson from the average salesperson. Skilled salespeople listen carefully to what
information the customer provides and use that information to organize their thoughts
about how to respond to customer's needs. Therefore, listening skills are expected to
have a positive impact on sales representative's sales performance.
H4: There is a positive relationship between salespeoples listening skills and
Finally, questioning skills are expected to have positive impact on sales
performance. Questions persuade more powerfully than any other form o f verbal
behavior. Probing for information and asking questions may help salespeople to identify
customers problems or needs that are not obvious. The use o f questions is associated
with the success o f the interaction. The following hypothesis is proposed:
H5: There is a positive relationship between salespeoples questioning skills and
24
The following flow chart shows the relationship between the five selling abilities
and sales representative's sales performance. Positive relationships are expected between
each o f the five selling abilities and sales performance.
A daptability
K nowledge
Presentation
S ales Perform ance
S kills
Listening
Skills
Q uestioning
Skills
Figure 2.1. Conceptual Framework.
Other Influencing Factors

Although selling abilities are the primary factors that will be examined in the
present study, it is also important to derive a list o f other factors that may have influences
on sales performance and to rule out alternative explanations. Personal variables are
defined as "intra-individual factors that might be related to salespeople's performance but
which are not part o f the aptitude, skill level, motivation, and role perceptions
components" (Churchill, Ford, Hartley, & Walker, 1985). Past studies have shown that
personal characteristics are predictors o f sales performance (Churchill, Ford, Hartley, &
Walker, 1985). The list o f important factors in this current study specifically includes
salespersons gender, age, education, and job tenure.
Gender
Salesperson's gender may have an impact on selling effectiveness. While gender
roles have been changing in our culture, vestiges o f the past remain. Differential
socialization may leave residual traces that affect the way salesmen and saleswomen
approach their jobs. Lagace and Twibble (1990) suggest that women in industrial selling
tend to be androgynous. Goolsby, Lagace and Boorom (1992) also suggest that
androgyny is more closely related to adaptive selling in saleswomen than it is in
salesmen. Meyers-Levey and Maheswaran (1991) propose that women may use different
processing strategies that could affect the way they relate to customers.
Women are alleged to be actually better suited for selling. Women are said to be
naturally better listeners and adaptive in their selling styles. Comer and Jolson (1991)
suggest that womens sex-role prepares them very well for selling. Their characteristic
nurturing and sensitivity to others, equip them well for the interpersonal aspects o f the
job. Studies have also demonstrated womens strength in various areas such as their
empathetic listening (Cole, 1985; Figel, 1983; Skolnik, 1985), their strong work ethic
(Cole, 1985; Figel, 1983), their service orientation (Figel, 1983; Skolnik, 1985), their
organization (Figel, 1983), their detail orientation, their long range thinking (Linkemer,
1989), and their humanistic approach to moral reasoning (Dawson, 1992).
26
Based on previous research, gender is expected to have an impact on sales

performance. Women in particular are expected to have higher sales performance than
their male counterparts.
Age
In a retail sales encounter, Kang and Hillery (1998) found that older customers
had more favorable attitudes toward older retail salespeople than toward younger
salespeople. Even younger customers expressed a higher preference for older salespeople
than for younger salespeople.
Thurston, Lennon, & Clayton (1990) suggest that age contributes to a professional
image, with older age conveying an impression o f experience and competence.
Organizational behavior perspective also suggests that older salespeople are generally
more involved in their job and place greater emphasis on work values. Therefore, age is
expected to have a positive relationship on sales performance. Older salespeople should
have a higher level of performance than younger salespeople.
Education and Job Tenure

Better-educated and experienced salespeople may have a more ecumenical view
o f the world, which might make them better able to see other people's points o f view
(Comer & Drollinger, 1996). They may also have better-developed and richer knowledge
structures than others, which may have some impact on sales performance.
Job tenure is another factor that may have influences on sales performance.
Salespeople who have been in their current positions for a relatively longer time tend to
27
be more familiar with the individual territory. They may also have built up a good
relationship with their customers. Their clients may also feel more comfortable to contact
them when they have questions.
In general, it is expected that education and job tenure will have a positive
relationship with sales performance. Sales representatives with higher education and
longer employment history in sales will perform better.
28
CHAPTER 3 - METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the research design and statistical procedures to be used for
analysis in the current study. Data collection and variables descriptions are outlined.
Data Collection
The data for this study were obtained from a large international pharmaceutical
company. The first part o f the data was the objective/quantitative measurement. Sales
quota attainment was obtained from the companys database. The second part o f the data
came from a survey o f salespersons self-ratings on selling abilities and sales
performance. A questionnaire was developed based on previous studies in the literature.
Before the questionnaire was administered, a pretest was carried out. Five sales
representatives were asked to fill out the questionnaire. Information such as whether
instructions are clear, any problem items, how much time is required to complete the
questionnaire were collected. The feedback from sales representatives was positive. No
revision was made.
After the questionnaire was finalized, it was sent out to the selected participants.
A random sample o f 1,500 sales representatives was selected from the companys total
3,000 representatives sales force. A questionnaire was sent to the sales representatives at
their home addresses. A cover letter explaining the intent o f the study and confidentiality
29
accompanied with the questionnaire. Questionnaires were numbered to ensure tracking

and used to match quantitative measurement (quota attainment).
Appendix A .l presents the cover letter and Appendix A.2 presents the
questionnaire.
Dependent Variables
Appendix A.3 presents a detailed review o f sales performance measures. Based
on the literature, sales performance was measured in two ways. The first measure
consisted o f two self-evaluations from salespeople which measure self-reported success.
The widely used scale for sales performance developed by Behrman and Perreault (1982)
and refined by Castleberry, Shepherd, and Ridnour (1998) was used. Research has
shown this to be related to sales expertise, job satisfaction, and adaptability and therefore
a valid measure o f sales performance (Castleberr, Shepherd, & Ridnour, 1998). The
second self-report measure is the scale developed by Blackshear and Plank (1993). An
objective measure o f sales performance was a measure used by the pharmaceutical sales
company and was based on the calculation o f quota adjustment for territory difficulty a
sales representative is responsible for. This measure is used by the pharmaceutical
company to evaluate salespeoples job performance and to compensate representatives.
Self-Ratings
The self-rating scale developed by Behrman and Perreault (1982) and adapted by
Castleberry, Shepherd, and Ridnour (1998) was used to measure sales performance. The
4-item scale used by Castleberry, Shepherd, and Ridnour (1998) has been used in a
30
previous study on international electronics selling environment (Castleberry, Shepherd, &

Ridnour, 1998). The scale was found to be reliable with Cronbachs alpha o f 0.82.
Validity o f the scale has been demonstrated in the original study by Behrman and
Perreault (1982). The correlation o f these self-report measures with the comparable
component evaluation from sales managers, profitability data and internal company
ratings was derived. In combination it was suggested that the self-report scale captures
common variance with other indicators o f performance. In addition, numerous empirical
studies have used this scale and demonstrated the validity o f this scale (e.g., Auglin,
Stolman, & Gentry, 1990; Castleberry, Shepherd, & Ridnour, 1998; Churchill, Ford,
Hartley, & Walker, 1985; Goolsby, Lagace, & Boorom, 1992).
Following are the 4 items from Behrman and Perreault (1982):
1.
I produce a high market share for my company in my territory.
2.
I identify and sell to major accounts in my territory.
3.
I exceed all sales targets and objectives for my territory during the year.
4.
I generate a high level o f dollar sales.
Another scale with 4 items developed based on job description will also be used.
This scale is based on a study by Blackshear and Plank (1993) in a pharmaceutical sales
context. A Cronbach's alpha o f 0.84 was reported in their study. This scale is
appropriate for this study because o f several reasons. First, their study was also
conducted in a pharmaceutical sales setting. So these measures are pertinent to this
specific industry. Second, sales managers evaluation data were examined in the original
study and similar relationship was found between sales performance and the independent
variables (adaptive behavior).
31
Following are the 4 items scale for sales performance from Blackshear and Plank
(1993).
1. I achieve sales call goals.
2. I achieve market share goals.
3. I achieve sales goals.
4. I achieve overall goals.
Quota Attainment
Quota attainment came from the companys database. Each individual territory is
to compare with its pre-determined quota. The quota is predetermined based on factors
such as territory potential, territory difficulty, and competition. The ratio o f actual sales
over preset sales is the quota attainment for that individual territory or salesperson. The
company uses quota attainment as the base for performance evaluation and incentive
compensations.
Independent Variables
Independent variables in this study include five selling ability variables and
control variables. Five selling ability variables are adaptability (ADAPT), knowledge
(KNOW), presentation skill (PRESEN), listening skill (LISTEN), and questioning skill
(INTER). Control variables include age (AGE), gender (GENDER), education
(EDUCA), and job tenure (TENURE). Age was measured as a continuous variable by
subtracting the year the respondent was bom from the current year. Gender was coded as
male (1) and female (0), a dichotomous variable. Education was measured in five
groups: less than high school, high school, some college, college, and graduate degree.
32
Job tenure was measured as number o f years in sales profession. Table 3.1 summarizes
the measurement and discussion on scales to be used follows after the table.
Table 3.1
Measures o f Variables
Deoendend Variable
Measure
Sales Performance
8 items (Cronbach's alpha = .82)

quota attainment
Independent Variables
Measure
Selling Ability Variables

Adaptability
Knowledge
Presentation Skill
Listening Skill
Questioning Skill
16 items (Cronbach's alpha = .75 & .63)

7 items
8 items
13 items (Cronbach's alpha = .80, .64, .91)
7 items
Control Variables
Measure
Age
Gender
Education
Tenure
year was bom

male/female
< high school, high school, some college, college, graduate degree
years/months o f service with the company
Adaptability
The measurement o f adaptability used the 16-item scale developed by Spiro and
Weitz (1990). The reliability (Cronbachs alpha) o f the scale was .85. Marks, Vorhies,
and Badovick (1996) suggested that two constructs (adaptive selling beliefs and adaptive
selling behaviors) were represented by the ADAPTS items. Therefore, the present study
used the modified version o f ADAPTS scale with both the behavior construct and belief
33
construct. The belief construct included questions 1 ,5 ,6 , and 14 and its Cronbach's
alpha is .63. The rest were in the behavior dimension and its Cronbach's alpha was .75.
The following ADAPTS scale was used for this study.
1. Each customer requires a unique approach.
2. When I feel that my sales approach is not working, I can easily change to another.
3. I like to experiment with different sales approaches.
4. I am very flexible in the selling approach I use.
5. I feel that most buyers can be dealt with in pretty much in the same manner.
6. I dont change my approach from one customer to another.
7. I can easily use a wide variety o f selling approaches.
8. I use a set sales approach.
9. It is easy for me to modify my sales presentation in the situation calls for it.
10. Basically I use the same approach with most customers.
1 1 .1 am very sensitive to the needs o f my customers.
1 2 .1 find it difficult to adapt my presentation style to certain buyers.
13.1 vary my sales style from situation to situation.
1 4 .1 try to understand how one customer differs from another.
1 5 .1 feel confident that I can effectively change my planned presentation when
necessary.
1 6 .1 treat all o f my buyers pretty much the same.
Appendix A.4 reviewed the measurement used in prior research for adaptability in
details.
34
Product Knowledge
The scale for testing product knowledge was based on several textbooks and
Weilbakers definition. Studies suggested that more effective salespeople had greater
knowledge about their own companys products and also competitors products (Smith &
Owens, 1995; Sujan, Sujan, & Bettman, 1998). In order to be conclusive, a content
analysis was conducted. Table 3.2 presents the findings from the content analysis. These
items appear to be the most important items from major textbooks and were used for the
knowledge scale. The items were Likert-scaled from 1 to 7. In order to test validity o f
these measures, an item was added to the end o f the questionnaire, which asks
representatives to evaluate their overall product knowledge.
Presentation Skills
The scale for measuring presentation skills was developed through a content
analysis based on Weilbakers definition and several textbooks. A sales message has to
be effectively presented to the customer to maximize selling effectiveness. Verbal and
nonverbal transmissions of selling messages are critical in the selling process. The
results from the content analysis are presented in Table 3.3. These items appear to be the
most important items from major textbooks. Items were Likert-scaled from 1 being
strongly disagree to 7 being strongly agree. One additional item was added to the end
o f the questionnaire. This item asked representatives to rate themselves in terms o f
presentation skills and was used as a validity check.
Table 3.2
Content Analysis on Items from the Knowledue Scale
Item
Manning
Weitz, Castleberry, Pederson, Weight, Oberhaus, Ratliffe, Futrell Anderson
& Tanner (1998)
& Weitz (1984) & Staubel (1993) (1992) (1995) & Reece (1993)
1 1possess product knowledge

more than 1 am expected to know.
2 1spend above average time

on obtaining product knowledge.
3 1 have sufficient knowledge o f

my company's products.
4 1 am familiar with the pricing o f my company* s
products as well as that o f our competitors.
5 1 have a good understanding o f

my companys product line.
6 1 know competitor's products very well.
7 1 am familiar with all the clinical side effects

o f my companys products.
Table 3.3
Content Analysis on Items from the Presentation Skills Scale
Item
Manning
Weitz, Castleberry, Pederson, Weight, Oberhaus, Ratliffe, Futrcll Anderson
& Tanner (1998) & Weitz (1984) &Staubel(1993) (1992) (1995) & Reece (1993)
1 When I meet with my clients I am always well

prepared with great information about them.
2 I can verbally convey sales messages

well to my customers.
3 1 speak clearly and understandably.
4 1 vary the pace o f my speech when I give

sales presentations.
3 Within very limited interacting time, I can

hardly convey my sales messages.
6 My clients always actively participate

in my presentations.
7 Gestures and nonverbal symbols help me

a lot with my presentations.
8 Visual aids (sales aids) are appropriately

used in my presentations.
X
ON
37
Listening Skills
The measurement o f listening skills is another area that has been investigated and
debated by researchers. Three widely recognized and used scales o f listening skill
measurement include the Kentucky Comprehensive Listening Test (KCLT), the WatsonBarker Listening Test (WBLT), and the Communication Competency Assessment
Instrument (CCAI). Appendix A.5 presents a detailed discussion o f different types of
listening tests.
Within the sales/marketing arena, Ramsey and Sohi (1997) developed a listening
scale with three dimensions: sensing, evaluating, and responding. The Cronbach alpha o f
each dimension is .80, .64, and .91. One additional item was added to the end o f the
questionnaire. This item asked representatives to rate themselves in terms o f listening
skills and was used as a validity check. The following items were used for the listening
scale.
1. I focus only on my customers in a sales call.
2. I keep firm eye contact.
3. I pay attention to nonverbal gestures.
4. I never appear to be bored in the interactions with my customers
5. I always ask for more details from my customers.
6. I paraphrase my customers questions to better understand the meanings.
7. I do not interrupt my customers.
8. I do not change subject too frequently.
9. I try hard to understand what my customer is saying.
1 0.1 use full sentences instead o f saying yes or no.
38
11.1 offer relevant information to my customer's questions.

1 2.1 show eagerness in my responses to my customers.
13.1 answer my customer's questions at appropriate times.
Questioning Skills
The measurement o f questioning skills is based on Weilbakers definition and
guidelines from several textbooks. Pederson, Wright and Weitz (1988) proposed several
guidelines for asking good questions. These are:
1. Encourage longer responses
2. Space out questions
3. Ask short, simple questions
4. Avoid leading questions.
A content analysis was conducted to assess the face validity o f these items. The
items was Likert-scaled from 1 being strongly disagree to 7 being strongly agree.
Table 3.4 presents the results from content analysis. These items appear to be the most
important items from major textbooks. One additional item was added to the end o f the
questionnaire. This item asked representatives to rate themselves in terms o f
interrogative skills and was used as a validity check.
Statistical Analysis
Coefficient alpha is the basic statistic for determining the reliability o f a measure
based on internal consistency. A low coefficient alpha indicates the sample o f items
performs poorly in capturing the construct which motivated the measure. Conversely, a
large alpha indicates that the items correlates well with true scores. If alpha is low, this
Table 3.4
Content Analysis on Items from the Questioning Skills Scale
Item
Manning
Weitz, Castleberry, Pederson, Weight, Oberhaus, Ratlifle, Futrell Anderson
& Tanner (1998) & Weitz (1984) & Staubel (1993) (1992) (1995) & Reece (1993)
1 I always prepare a list o f questions to ask

my clients when 1 call on them.
2 1 always ask my clients whether they have

questions about my presentations.
3 1always know what my clients' needs are

from their questions.
4 1 receive a lot o f questions from my clients
during a sales call.
S 1can easily start a small talk" with my clients.
6 1 ask more open-ended questions and

fewer closed-ended questions.
7 I always have time to ask my clients in-depth

questions.
OJ
VO
40
outcome suggests that some items do not share equally in the common core and should be
eliminated. The simplest way to find them is to calculate the correlation o f each item
with the total score and to plot these correlations by decreasing order o f magnitude.
Items with correlations near zero would be eliminated. Further, items which produce a
substantial or sudden drop in the item-to-total correlations would also be deleted
(Churchill, 1979).
Factor analysis was performed on the data for each scale to determine the possible
dimensionality o f the underlying constructs. If factor analysis suggested that dimensions
which were conceptualized as independent clearly overlapped, items which had pure
loadings on the new factor were retained and a new alpha was calculated on the summed
items o f the dimensions.
Reliability checks and factor analyses should produce an internally consistent or
internally homogeneous set o f items. Consistency is necessary but not sufficient for
construct validity (Churchill, 1979). Rather, to establish the construct validity o f a
measure, researchers also must determine the extent to which the measures correlate with
other measures designed to measure the same thing.
Construct validity is most directly related to the question o f what the instrument is
in fact measuring the construct. It has been suggested that any particular construct or trait
should be measurable by at least two, and preferable more, different methods. Otherwise
the researcher has no way o f knowing whether the trait is anything but an artifact o f the
measurement procedure. Evidence o f the convergent validity o f the measure is provided
by the extent to which it correlates highly with other methods designed to measure the
same construct. The measure should have not only convergent validity, but also
41
discriminant validity. Discriminant validity is the extent to which the measure is indeed
novel and not simply a reflection o f some other variable. Quite simply, scales that
correlate too highly may be measuring the same rather than different constructs. The
measures used in this study were then analyzed.
In summary, three steps were undertaken to ensure the measurement was
appropriate. First, coefficient alpha was obtained to assess internal consistency. Second,
factor analysis was performed to identify construct dimensions. If necessary, coefficient
alpha were re-calculated. Third, a series o f five items were added to the end o f the
questionnaire. These items asked sales representatives to rate themselves of their selling
abilities. Correlation matrix between these items and the original measurement were
obtained to assess construct validity.
Two analyses were used to test the hypotheses. In the first, multiple regression
analysis was carried out for each o f the dependent variables (sales performance measures)
using the measures o f adaptability skills, listening skills, interrogative skills, presentation
skills, knowledge as independent variables. Direct positive relationships between these
measures and sales performance were predicted and should be found as significant
variables in the regressions. A single variable was composed for each scale. If a scale
consisted o f two or more factors (dimensions), the average score on the items o f the two
or more factors was used as the independent variable (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).
The second test o f the hypothesis was to develop a regression model on sales
performance measures and individual factors. If a scale was not unidimensional, each
individual factor contributing to the scale was regressed to sales performance measures.
Since no studies in sales performance have been done in this manner (all studies having
42
independently looked at adaptability, knowledge, presentation skills, listening skills, and
questioning skills as each relates to performance), this study examined how salespeople
developed their effectiveness in a comprehensive manner.
Review o f Multiple Regression Models

Probabilistic models that include more than one independent variable or higherorder terms (x:, x3) are called multiple regression models. The general form o f these
models is
Y = po + PiXi + P2X2 + ... + pkXk + e
The dependent variable Y is now written as a function o f k independent variables, xi, X:,
Xk. The random error term is added to make the model probabilistic rather than
deterministic. Therefore, Y is composed o f two components - one fixed and one random
- and, consequently, Y is a random variable. There are two assumptions we make about
the random error e. First, for any given set o f values o f x s, s has a normal probability
distribution with mean equal to 0 and variance equal to cr. Second, the random errors are
independent of each other.
The method o f fitting multiple regression models is least squares. That is, we
choose the estimated model
Y = Po + P 1X1 + P2X2 + ... + PkXk
That minimizes
SSE = S(Yj - Yj)2
The sample estimates P0.P 1.P 2
- Pk will be obtained as solutions to a set o f simultaneous
linear equations.
43
The least squares matrix equation is
(XX) p = X Y
The solution is
p = (Xx y 'x Y
Given the computational difficulty with matrix operations, computer packages are
usually used to solve the least squares matrix equation.
The variance o f the random error (a 2) represents the error in estimating the model
parameters. Since the variance o f the random error is usually unknown, we must use
regression results to estimate its value. The estimator o f ct2 is
SSE = I ( Y i- Y i)2
We use R2 as a measure o f how well the model fits the data.
R2 = I - SSE/SSyy
Where SSE = I(Y i - Yi)2, SSyy = X(Yi - ft)2
In this study, the multiple regression model can be written as:
Sales Performance = po + Pi (Adaptability) + P2 (Presentation skills) + p 3 (Product
Knowledge) + p4 (Listening Skills) + Ps (Questioning Skills) + e
44
CHAPTER 4 - RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Sample Characteristics
A total o f 547 usable questionnaires (1,500 were sent) were returned for a
response rate o f 36%. The respondents consisted o f 277 (50.6%) male sales
representatives and 264 (48.3%) female sales representatives. The average age o f
respondents was 38 years with 99.5% having a college education. About 41% also had
either postgraduate work or graduate degree beyond the college education. Job tenure
ranged from 1 month to 40 years, with an average o f 10 years. Table 4.1 presents the
characteristics o f the sample.
Table 4.1
Sample Characteristics
Gender
Education
Male
Female
Unknown
Total
Some College
College
Post Graduate Wor :
Graduate Degree
Unknown
Total
Min
Age (years)
23
Job Tenure
1 month
Sales Call Length 30 seconds
277
264
6
547
3
315
120
104
5
547
50.6%
48.3%
1.1%
0.5%
57.6%
21.9%
19.0%
0.9%
Mean
Max
38
65
10 years 40 years
9 minutes 60 minutes
45
Analysis o f Dependent Variables
Self-Reported Sales Performance

There were 8 questions used to measure sales performance (Behrman, &
Perreault, 1982; Blackshear, & Plank, 1993; Castleberry, Shepherd, & Ridnour, 1998; see
Table 4.2). To assess the degree to which these questions were measuring the same
construct (sales effectiveness), a factor analysis was performed. If the questions were
measuring the same construct the factor analysis should show a single strong factor
emerging. Principle Component analysis with Varimax rotation verified that except for
two questions (#2 and #5 with factor loading less than 0.6) the questions were measuring
a single construct (see Table 4.2). These two items therefore were removed from the
final analysis.
Table 4.2
Factor Analysis of Self-Rating Performance Scale
Item #
I achieve market share goals.
6
I achieve sales goals.
7
I exceed all sales targets and objectives for my territory during the year
3
1
I achieve overall goals.
8
I generate a high level o f dollar sales.
4
I achieve sales call goals.
5
I identify and sell to m ajor accounts in my territory.
2
Eigenvalue
Variance Explained
Factor I
0.88
0.86
0.84
0.81
0.74
0.74
0.54
0.11
Factor 2
-0.17
-0.10
-0.21
-0.16
0.13
-0.07
0.20
0.84
4.8
0.89
60%
11%
46
To examine internal consistency, Cronbachs alpha was calculated. The alpha
coefficient for the 7-item scale was 0.91 which compared favorably to consistencies
achieved in previous work using objective outcome measures: 0.82 from the study by
Castleberry, Shepherd, and Ridnour (1998) and 0.84 from the study by Blackshear and
Plank (1993).
To test the face validity o f the outcome questions the relationship between the 6item scale was correlated with a validation item placed towards the end o f the
questionnaire. The item asks the respondent to self-evaluate his/her own sales
performance on a scale from 0 to 10 (10 being the best sales performance). The
correlation was positive and significant, r=0.61, <0.0001. This indicates that at least on
its face the sum o f the six items reflects self-perceived effectiveness.
Quota Attainment
Quota attainment was used as the objective measurement for the dependent
variable in this study. The average quota attainment was 103%. The lowest quota
attainment was 76% and the highest quota attainment was 132%. The correlation
between quota and the summed self-report o f performance .84 (<.05) indicating that the
self-reporting measure reflected how well a sales representative thought they performed.
In summary, the dependent measures appeared to be valid and reliable measures
o f outcome.
47
Analysis o f Independent Variables
Adaptability Scale
A factor analysis using Principle Component analysis with Varimax rotation was
conducted on the 16 items o f the original scale (Spiro & Weitz, 1990) to assess the
degree to which the adaptability scale was measuring a one-dimensional construct. The
results supported a 2-factor solution (Table 4.3). The first factor explained 30% o f the
variance and the second factor explained 29% o f the variance. Four items contributed to
factor 1 while four other items contributed to factor 2. The Cronbachs alpha o f the items
on the first factor was 0.74 while the Cronbachs for the items o f the second factor was
.80 indicating the two factors were reasonably internally consistent. To assess the
adaptability scales construct validity, a correlation was run between the summed 4-item
scale (Factor 1) with a self-evaluation o f selling flexibility. The correlation was positive
and significant, r=0.57, <0.0001, supporting the view that factor I measures selling
adaptability.
The correlation o f the second factor with the self-report o f flexibility was also
positive and significant (r= 0.54, p<0.0001).
Thus both factors o f the selling adaptability scale appear to be related to selling
flexibility although the existence o f two distinct factors suggests that the scale is
measuring different aspects o f flexibility. This supports the multi-dimensional nature o f
adaptability suggested by Marks, Vorhies, and Badovick (1996).
The Cronbachs alphas for the adaptability scale while lower than would have
been liked were higher than those found measuring adaptability in previous research on
Table 4.3
Factor Analysis o f Adaptability Scale
Basically 1 use the sam e approach with m ost customers.

I treat all o f my buyers pretty m uch the same.
I feel that most buyers can be dealt with pretty much in the sam e manner.
1 don't change my approach from one custom er to another.
It is easy for me to modify my sales presentation in the situation calls for it.
1 find it difficult to adapt my presentation style to certain buyers.
I feel confident that 1 can effectively change my planned presentation when necessary
W hen I feel that my sales approach is not working, 1 can easily change to another.
I can easily use a w ide variety o f selling approaches.
I vary m y sales style from situation to situation.
I am very flexible in the selling approach 1 use.
1 try to understand how one custom er differs from another.
Each custom er requires a unique approach.
I like to experim ent with different sales approaches.
I am very sensitive to the needs o f my custom ers.
1 use a set sales approach.
Item it
10
16
5
6
9
12
15
2
7
13
4
14
1
3
II
8
Factor 1
0.80
0.73
0.69
0.61
0.04
0.19
0.03
-0.04
0.07
0.28
0.11
0.13
0.20
0.02
0.02
-0.65
Factor 2
0.20
0.00
-0.06
0.03
0.74
0.68
0.64
0.60
0.55
0.41
0.39
0.10
-0.04
0.01
0.22
-0.23
Eigenvalue
2.65
2.57
Variance Explained
30%
29%
p .
00
49
measuring adaptive selling. The adaptive belief construct o f Marks, Vorhies, and
Badhovicks study had a Cronbachs alpha o f 0.63 and the behavior construct had a
Cronbachs alpha o f 0.75 .
Product Knowledge Scale

The product knowledge scale came from a content analysis. To assess the
adequacy o f the measure o f product knowledge a factor analysis using the Principle
Component method with varimax rotation was performed. The results suggested that the
questions were measuring a single factor explaining 51% o f the variance (Table 4.4). A
second factor accounting for 13% o f the variance did not have questions with
independent factor loadings that suggest a second independent factor was being
measured.
The Cronbachs alpha o f the scale was 0.83 suggesting good internal consistency.
To check construct validity, the correlation between this scale and the validation item
(self-evaluation o f product knowledge on a scale from 0 to 10) was significant, r=64,
P<0.0001. Table 4.4 presents the factor loadings and Eigenvalues for this scale.
Presentation Skills Scale

Presentation skills scale was developed from a content analysis. To assess the
adequacy and structure o f the presentation skills scale a factor analysis using Principle
Component method with varimax rotation was completed and supported a two-factor
factor 1 was 0.69 and 0.58 for factor 2 (these Cronbach alphas are clearly lower than
desired but within a tolerable as measured against previous research measuring these
constructs). The correlation between the factors and the validation item (self-evaluation
Table 4.4
Factor Analysis o f Product Knowledge Scale
Item # Factor 1 Factor 2
6
0.81
-0.03
I know competitor's products very well.
0.76
-0.30
5
I have a good understanding of my companys product line.
-0.29
3
0.72
1 have sufficient knowledge of my company's products.
1
0.69
0.53
I possess product knowledge more than I am expected to know.
-0.29
4
0.69
I am familiar with the pricing o f my company's products as well as that of our competitor
0.68
-0.13
I am familiar with all the clinical side effects o f my companys products.
7
2
0.63
0.61
1 spend above average time on obtaining product knowledge.
Eigenvalue
3.55
0.93
Variance Explained
51%
13%
C /l
51
o f presentation skills on a scale from 0 to 10) was 0.67 and 0.58 respectively (p<0.0001)
indicating good construct validity. Two items (#5 and #7) that did not have high loadings
on any factor were removed from further analysis.
Factor 1 appears to represent basic presentation skills such as can verbally
convey sales messages, speak clearly and understandably, and vary the pace o f
speech. On the other hand, factor 2 represents more interactive presentation skills such
as active client participation, well prepared before meeting with clients, and use
gestures and nonverbal symbols. Given that interaction time between a pharmaceutical
sales representative and a doctor may be very limited, it may not be an easy task to
involve clients active participation and it may limit the use o f gestures and nonverbal
symbols. Therefore it is reasonable to separate presentation skills into Basic versus
Interactive skills.
Listening Skills Scale

Ramsey and Sohi (1997) suggested that listening was a higher-order construct
composed o f three dimensions: sensing, evaluating, and responding. In this study, the
Principle Component analysis with Varimax rotation on listening scale supported Ramsey
and Sohis conclusions that this scale had three dimensions. The factor analysis showed
that four items contributed to sensing, three items contributed to evaluating, and four
items contributed to responding. Item 1 (I focused on my customers) and 6 (I paraphrase
my customers questions to better understand what they are asking) were split-loaded
among three factors and were removed from further analysis. Item 9 ,1 0 ,4 , 5 all had
52
loadings less than 0.60 and were removed from further analysis. Table 4.6 presents the
results from factor analysis.
To check internal consistency, Cronbachs alphas were obtained. The Cronbachs
alphas o f sensing, evaluating, and responding elements were 0.60,0.56, and 0.75
respectively, suggesting that although internal consistency was lower than desired this
scale was internally consistent when compared to Cronbachs obtained in earlier research
with measures like this (Ramsey & Sohi, 1997). Construct validity was also obtained.
The correlations o f the three dimensions and the self-report question used for validation
were .53, .58, and .64 (psO .0001) respectively, suggesting the scale had good construct
validity. Table 4.6 presents the factor analysis results on listening scale.
Two items (I focus on my customers and I paraphrase my customers questions)
were split-loaded in this study and removed from further analysis.
Table 4.7 compares the differences and similarities o f factor loadings in this study
and Ramsey and Sohis study. Overall, the dimensionality on listening skills obtained
from this study supports the results from the early study by Ramsey and Sohi (1997).
Questioning Skills Scale

Questioning skills scale was developed from a content analysis. The structure and
adequacy o f the questioning part o f the questionnaire was assessed with a factor analysis
using a Principle Component factor analysis with varimax rotation. One factor emerged
and explained 37% o f the variance. A second factor explaining 14% o f the variance with
a negligible Eigenvalue and low factor loadings suggest the scale is essentially
unidimensional. A Cronbachs alpha o f 0.71 suggests moderate internal consistency.
Table 4.5
Factor Analysis o f Presentation Skills Scale
Item
I speak clearly and understandably.
I can verbally convey sales m essages well to my custom ers.
I vary the pace o f m y speech when I give sales presentations.
Gestures and nonverbal sym bols help me a lot w ith my presentations.
W ithin very lim ited interacting time, 1 can hardly convey my sales m essages.
Visual aids (sales aids) are appropriately used in m y presentations.
M y clients always actively participate in my presentations.
W hen I meet with m y clients 1 am always well prepared with great inform ation about them
if Factor 1 Factor 2
3
0.84
0.05
2
0.80
0.18
4
0.64
0.12
0.34
0.23
7
5
0.25
0.17
8
0.13
0.66
6
0.12
0.66
0.06
1
0.73
Eigenvalue
1.98
1.55
Variance Explained
43%
34%
Table 4.6
Factor Analysis o f Listening Skills Scale
Item # Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3
12
0.79
0.07
0.00
I show eagerness in my responses to my customers.
11
0.14
0.21
I offer relevant information to my customer's questions.
0.77
I answer my customers questions at appropriate times.
13
0.66
0.23
0.24
9
0.59
0.28
0.11
I try hard to understand what my customers are telling me.
0.02
I use non-verbal gestures to suggest that I am listening to my customers.
3
0.73
0.04
0.16
0.06
2
0.71
I keep firm eye contact with my customers.
0.50
5
0.35
0.19
I ask for more details from my customers.
4
0.31
I don't appear to be bored to my customers.
0.47
0.07
0.06
8
0.78
I do not change the subject frequently.
0.05
0.12
0.14
0.74
I do not interrupt my customers.
7
10
0.10
I use frill sentences in my responses rather than yeses and nos.
0.24
0.52
1
0.42
0.42
0.23
I focus on my customers in a sales call.
6
I paraphrase my customer's questions to better understand what they are asking.
0.13
0.42
0.34
Eigenvalue
2.52
2.05
1.76
Variance Explained
40%
32%
28%
I*
Table 4.7
Listening Scale: Comparisons with Ramsev and Sohis Results
Item # Ramsey and Sohi Current Study
Responding
12 Responding
11
Responding
Responding
I offer relevant information to my customer's questions.
Responding
13 Responding
I answer my customer's questions at appropriate times.
9
Evaluating
Out
Sensing
3 Sensing
2 Sensing
Sensing
S Evaluating
Out
1 ask for more details from my customers.
Out
4 Sensing
I don't appear to be bored to my customers.
Evaluating
8 Evaluating
7 Evaluating
Evaluating
10 Responding
Out
I use full sentences in my responses rather than yeses and nos.
Out
1 Sensing
Out
6 Evaluating
I paraphrase my customers questions to better understand what they are asking.
56
The correlation between this scale and the validation item (self-evaluation o f questioning
skills on a scale from 0 to 10) was 0.63 (<0.0001), suggesting this scale has good
construct validity. Table 4.8 presents the factor analysis o f this scale.
Table 4.8
Factor Analysis o f Questioning Skills Scale
Item U Factor 1
3
0.71
4
0.70
7
0.61
1
0.61
2
0.61
6
0.51
5
0.45
Factor 2
-0.19
-0.18
-0.06
0.39
0.39
-0.02
-0.24
Eigenvalue
2.59
0.96
Variance Explained
37%
14%
I always know what my clients' needs are from their questions.

I receive a lot of questions from my clients during a sales call.
I always have time to ask my clients in-depth questions.
I always prepare a list o f questions to ask my clients when I call on them.
I always ask my clients whether they have questions about my presentations
I ask more open-ended questions and fewer closed-ended questions.
I can easily start a small talk with my clients.
Multiple Regression Analyses
Composite Scale o f Independent Variables

The hypotheses were that each o f the independent variables was positively related
and predictive o f sales effectiveness. Table 4.9 presents the results from multiple
regression analysis. All five independent variables were regressed against the two
outcome measures o f effectiveness. If an independent variable was loaded on more than
one factor, a composite scale was composed as the average score o f the items within the
factors.
The R2s o f the two regression models were 15% and 20%. The regression
models showed that product knowledge was the most significant factor in predicting sales
57
performance. Presentation skills and adaptability were also significant in the models for
both self-rated performance and quota attainment measures. Listening skills and
questioning skills were not significant in two models.
Based on the results from regression analyses, hypothesis one is supported. There
is a positive relationship between adaptability and sales performance. Hypothesis two is
also supported. Salespeople with more product knowledge are more effective than those
with less product knowledge. Hypothesis three is supported. Salespeople with better
presentation skills are more effective than were those with average presentation skills.
Hypothesis four is not supported. The findings do not suggest a significant
relationship between listening skills and sales performance. Questioning skills are not
significantly related to sales performance based on regression results. Hypothesis five is
not supported.
Table 4.9
Multiple Regression Results o f All Independent Variables
Dependent Variable
Self-Rating
R2
Adaptability
Presentation Skills
Listening Skills
Product Knowledge
Questioning Skills
Quota Attainment
15%
Parameter
Estimate
t-value
0.14
0.26
0.08
0.34
0.04
3.05
329
0.90
5.59
0.79
20%
P<
0.0024
0.0011
0.3698
0.0001
0.4322
Parameter
Estimate
0.023
0.048
0.002
0.048
0.004
t-value
3.48
4.22
0.13
5.40
0.54
P<
0.0005
0.0001
0.8963
0.0001
0.5903
58
At the Factor Level

Since earlier factor analyses o f the scales show that some o f the scales are not
unidimensional, it would be interesting to examine the relationship between each factor
and the outcome variables. A multiple regression analysis was performed at each factor
level. Table 4.10 presents the results from multiple regression analysis.
All factors from each scale were regressed against the two outcome measures o f
effectiveness. Adaptability belief appeared not to be a significant predictor o f sales
performance. On the other hand, adaptability behavior was significantly related to sales
performance (t=7.38 jK.OOOl for self-rating and t=7.5 <.0001 for quota attainment).
This finding is highly consistent with the results from Marks, Vorhies, and Badovick
(1996). They also demonstrated that adaptive selling beliefs did not influence sales
person performance directly. As previous researchers suggested, beliefs often influence
behavior, yet do not always have a direct effect on the outcome o f a given transaction
(Ryan & Bonfield, 1975). Salespeople may believe that a certain technique would be
useful or important in their selling practices, but they may not or do not use it given
various selling circumstances. As a result, the relationship between adaptive selling
beliefs and sales performance is not statistically significant. It appears that measuring
adaptive selling behaviors is a more valid approach to predict sales performance.
Presentation skills consisted o f Basic presentation skills and Interactive
presentation skills. Basic presentation skills such as speak clearly and understandably
and vary the pace o f speech appeared to be significantly related to sales performance.
More interactive type o f skills such as client participation and well-prepared before
the meeting were also significantly related to sales performance, but the t-values were
59
lower. This finding is probably related to the nature and time o f the interactions between
sales representatives and doctors. Many o f these sales calls happened in between exam
rooms or hallways. Given the limited time for the interaction, it seems very difficult for a
sales representative to actively involve clients (doctors). Despite interactive presentation
skills may be very effective in a sales call, a pharmaceutical sales representative may not
be able to use them. On the other hand, basic presentation skills appeared to be directly
related to sales performance.
Product knowledge appeared to be significantly related to sales performance
(pc.0001). Apparently pharmaceutical sales representatives have to master all specifics
o f the product, including efficacy, safety facts, side effect and so on to be able to
communicate with physicians.
From factor analysis, three dimensions appeared in listening scale. These are
sensing, evaluating, and responding. The results from the regression models showed that
sensing and evaluating were not significantly related to sales performance, while
responding was significantly related to sales performance. Once again, sensing and
evaluating components may be important listening skills, but the limited interaction time
may prevent a sales representative mentally going through all three stages o f listening.
The findings from regression models showed that questioning skills were not
significantly related to sales performance.
60
Table 4.10
Multiple Regression Results o f All Factors
Dependent Variable
Self-Rating
R2
Quota Attainment
18%
Parameter
Estimate
t-value
-0.001
0.31
0.43
0.10
-0.22
-0.18
0.24
0.25
-0.04
-0.03
4.13
2.88
1.00
-1.20
-1.39
1.43
4.64
-0.77
Adaptability Belief
Adaptability Behavior
Basic Presentation Skills
Interactive Presentation Skills
Listening - Sensing
Listening - Evaluating
Listening - Responding
Product Knowledge
Questioning Skills
23%
P<
Parameter
Estimate
0.9787
0.0001
0.0041
0.3201
0.2292
0.1629
0.1531
0.0001
0.4410
0.001
0.006
0.013
0.004
-0.003
-0.004
0.011
0.006
0.001
t-value
1.05
3.05
3.66
1.57
-0.74
-1.41
2.70
4.36
0.64
P<
0.2959
0.0024
0.0003
0.1174
0.4623
0.1585
0.0071
0.0001
0.5207
Influences o f Demographic Variables

Besides selling abilities, other demographic factors may potentially have impact
on sales performance. In this study, age, gender, education, and job tenure o f sales
representatives were examined.
After adding age, gender, education, and job tenure to the multiple regression
equation with five selling abilities, age appeared to be positively related to sales
performance, but the relationship was not significant. Older salespeople may or may not
perform better than younger salespeople. Male salespeople might have better sales
performance, but again the relationship was not significant. Since 99.5% o f the
responders had college degrees or higher, responders were grouped to two groups:
61
college education and graduate degree. There was no performance difference for these
two groups.
Job tenure, on the other hand, was the only significant demographic variable
(p<0.009 & 0.094). Salespeople who have worked for a relatively long time in sales had
higher sales performance than those who are relatively new to the field.
In summary, the current study supports that demographic aspects o f salespeople
may explain some differences o f sales performance. Among the variables examined, job
tenure is the only one affecting sales performance. Age, gender, and education do not
appear to influence sales performance.
Table 4.11
Influences o f Demographic Variables
Dependent Variable
Quota Attainment
Self-Rating
R2
Adaptability
Presentation Skills
Listening Skills
Product Knowledge
Questioning Skills
Age
Male
Graduate School/Degree
Job Tenure
21%
17%
Parameter
Estimate
t-value
0.14
0.24
0.05
0.33
0.02
0.017
0.15
0.104
0.022
3.05
2.90
0.58
5.19
0.47
1.252
1.914
1.33
2.62
P<
0.0024
0.0040
0.5621
0.0001
0.6419
0.248
0.0561
0.1827
0.009
Parameter
Estimate
0.023
0.048
0.002
0.048
0.004
0.002
0.016
0.002
0.002
t-value
3.48
4.22
0.13
5.40
0.54
1.07
1.389
0.192
1.677
P<
0.0005
0.0001
0.8963
0.0001
0.5903
0.285
0.1655
0.8476
0.094
62
CHAPTER 5 - CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
The purpose o f this study was to illuminate the relationship between selling
ability and sales performance. While past research has shown that the relationship exists
the demonstration o f a relationship may not be enough. Selling ability consists o f any
number o f component factors. Knowing that a higher selling ability leads to greater sales
effectiveness is not as illuminating as knowing what factors within a global construct o f
selling ability are determinant. Based on past research that defined the factors o f selling
ability this study looked into the five most important selling abilities (defined by research
by Weilbaker, 1990): adaptability, product knowledge, listening skills, presentation skills,
and questioning skills. Scales were developed (again based on past research) to measure
these abilities and these were applied to a large diverse set o f salespeople from a large
pharmaceutical chain. Sales in this pharmaceutical chain represent a type o f selling
(missionary selling) that appears to have been neglected in the research literature.
The findings from this study provide insight into the relationship between selling
abilities and salespeoples sales performance. The findings contribute and fill a gap in
the selling ability performance link with an in-depth investigation o f pharmaceutical
sales. The findings contribute to the literature by looking at the determinant components
o f the link between selling ability and performance. The findings contribute to the
methodological literature by showing a correspondence between self-
63
reported/assessments o f sales ability and more objective forms o f measuring selling
ability.
First o f all, this study was able to relate self-rated sales performance with actual
quota attainment data. As suggested by Churchill, Ford, Hartley, and Walker, Jr (1985),
self-reported measures may demonstrate upward bias from responders with a tendency to
give socially desirable responses. This study showed a high correspondence between self
and objective assessment o f selling ability. Based on the findings from this study, these
two measures appear to be highly correlated. It seems that the self-reported performance
does reflect the actual quota attainment making research on selling ability a bit easier.
There may not be a requirement that researchers always have objective measures o f sales
performance in this type o f research. Objective data is always harder to get. However,
more work needs to be done on this relationship. A perfect isomorphic relationship
between the two variables was not found. Boundary conditions o f when objective and
subjective measurement is appropriate need to be completed.
While an overall relationship between selling ability and performance was found
the detail o f this study shows clearly that selling ability consists o f differing components
and these components may or may not be determinant in performance.
Adaptability appears to consist o f two constructs: adaptive selling belief and
adaptive selling behavior. While belief may indicate behavior or influence behavior, it
may not necessarily result in behavior. In this study adaptive selling belief was not
positively related to sales performance. This finding o f multi-dimensionality o f the
ADAPTS scale explains why researchers who used the original unidimensional scale to
measure adaptability found the scales inability to predict sales performance consistently.
64
The findings are highly consistent with an early study by Mark, Vorhies, and Badovick
(1996). Adaptive selling behavior was found to predict selling performance. This is
consistent with the range o f research and thinking about the role o f the professional sales
person and supports the view that adaptability is important in pharmaceutical sales given
the nature o f this type o f selling (different and changing needs, short time to influence).
Product knowledge has also found to be significantly associated with sales
performance. Salespeople who are more knowledgeable about their products tend to
perform better in their jobs. A persons solid knowledge base always comes handy in all
types o f selling. A strong mastery o f product knowledge may increase salespeoples
confidence and thus potentially the trust from customers, which may result in better sales
performance o f salespeople. This too reflects the past thinking and research on sales
ability.
This study suggests listening skills consisting o f three dimensions: sensing,
evaluating, and responding, as suggested by Ramsey and Sohi (1997). As past research
suggests and shows listening is not a one-dimensional construct but one consisting o f
three distinct components. Any one o f these components may be essential for a
salesperson to be highly effective in listening skills. However, the findings from this
study support that the responding dimension appears to be the most important o f the
three. It is possible that various selling situations foster the importance o f various
listening skills. The limited time o f interaction in pharmaceutical selling (or some other
aspect o f the selling situation in pharmaceutical sales) may inhibit the importance o f
sensing and evaluating while increasing the importance o f the responding dimension. Or
it could be that sensing and evaluating are nothing without the appropriate responding
65
element. The dimensionality o f the construct is based on internal structural dimensions
o f the scale and not external dimensionality. This is clearly in need o f further
investigation.
This study found that presentation skills consisted o f two constructs: basic
presentation skills and interactive presentation skills. Basic presentation skills are
positively associated with sales performance, while interactive presentation skills are not
significantly related to sales performance. These relationships may be specific to
pharmaceutical sales, missionary sales, or they may not be.
The study did not show any relationship between questioning skills and sales
performance on either o f the sales performance measures. This could mean that
questioning skills are simply not as important as past research and thinking implies. It
could mean that there is something unique about the pharmaceutical sales situation (very
short) that makes use and effectiveness o f this skill to be minimal (both interesting
possibilities). It certainly shows that one cannot take for granted assumptions about what
is important for effective selling.
While the details o f the relationships found are interesting it is important to note
the following. Different components may be determinant in differing sales types.
Replication o f the specific relationship found in the context o f this specific
pharmaceutical company needs to found in other missionary sales environments. Then
these relationships would need to be replicated across the various types o f sales
environments. Second, this research looked at the top five selling abilities based one
study o f the perception o f what was important to stake holders. We do not know the
66
consistency o f these perceptions. We do not know whether other abilities, lower on the
list, might actually be more important than the ones identified in this study.
The findings o f this study have interesting implications:
Implications for Practitioners

The findings from the current study should be extremely interesting to sales
managers. This study offers support to the contention that more successful salespeople
are very flexible in personal selling. They can adjust selling strategies according to the
situations. High performers also tend to have better listening skills and presentations
skills. If replicated and substantiated these findings can assist sales managers in their
recruiting and training efforts by focusing these efforts on the clearly demonstrated
effective skills.
In a recruiting process, managers should make extra efforts to identify potential
candidates who are adaptive or flexible in various selling situations, who possess
excellent product knowledge or are willing to team and who are good listeners and
presenters. Right now recruitment seems to be based on a belief that everything is
important. Everything may not be important and selection based on only those important
dimensions makes the process more effective and efficient and since recruitment is so
costly any money saved in this area is money that can be used more productively.
Companys training programs can be developed to cultivate only those selling
skills found to be important. Once again this is an efficiency effectiveness issue. But
knowing those things that are important for effective selling makes the training program
more effective for a sales organization. These issues are sharply etched by looking at the
67
training and selection program o f the pharmaceutical company used in this study. The
training program and selection criterion for this pharmaceutical company is spending
time and money training and selecting for non-determinant skills. The specifics o f this
study suggest that selection and training be based on what is known about behavioral
adaptability, basic presentation skills, listening-responding, and product knowledge; a
much simpler task than training and selection for everything.
Additionally most sales forces have skills development and enhancement
programs. These programs should be based on what is important for effectiveness. This
research suggests the areas that these continuing education thrusts should be focused on
(of course this assumes that the findings are not specific to this specific organization and
point in time).
Limitations and Future Research

Several limitations inherent in the design o f the present study provide
opportunities for future researchers. The current study investigated the relationship
between selling abilities and sales performance from the salespeoples perspective.
Future research may improve our understanding o f sales effectiveness by studying both
sides o f the customer-salespeople dyad simultaneously. In doing so, we may be able to
compare salespeoples perception o f their selling abilities to those o f the customers.
Several limitations may restrict the generalizability o f this study. First, as
previous stated, the responders for this study came from a single pharmaceutical
companys sales force. The current findings should be interpreted with caution when
68
considering making generalizations to other population groups. Research is needed to
replicate these analyses in additional selling situations to validate their generalizability.
Second, the very limited interaction time between physicians and sales
representatives may foster unique selling skills appropriate for this specific industry
setting. The effectiveness may not be generalizable to other types o f industry selling.
The present study also should elicit interests in further studies on developing
scales for selling ability measurement. Researchers interested in examining any o f the
selling abilities are well advised to develop additional items and subject the new set o f
items to a rigorous psychometric analysis.
Overall Conclusion
The findings o f this study support some o f the major research and thinking in the
sales field and are encouraging. The findings replicate some broad issues and take these
issues into other areas o f study. Like much in our field there may be more questions that
this study does not answer than it does answer. Yet the support for the basic relationship
between sales ability and performance, the notion that not all sales abilities have the same
importance, and the correspondence o f self-report and objective sales performance
measures makes interesting contributions to the literature.
LIST OF REFERENCES
69
LIST OF REFERENCES
Andaleeb, S. S, and Tallman, R. F. (1995). Physician attitudes toward

pharmaceutical sales representatives. Health Care Management Review. 20 (3), 68-76.
Anderson, R. E. (1995). Essentials o f personal selling: The new professionalism.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Anderson, E., & Oliver, R. L. (1987). Perspectives on behavior-based versus
outcome-based salesforce control systems. Journal o f Marketing. 51. 76-88.
Auglin, K. A., Stoltman, J. J., & Gentry, J. W. (1990). The congruence o f
manager perceptions o f salesperson performance and knowledge-based measures o f
adaptive selling. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management. jO (Fall), 81-90.
Avom, J., Chen, M., and Hartley, R. (1982). Scientific versus commercial sources
o f influence on the prescribing behavior o f physicians. The American Journal o f
Medicine. 73. 4-8.
Behrman, D. N., & Perreault, W. D., Jr. (1982). Measuring the performance of
industrial salespersons. Journal o f Business Research. 10 (September), 355-370.
Blackshear, T. R., & Plank, R. E. (1993). The relationship o f self-report taskspecific behaviors o f pharmaceutical salespeople to sales performance. Proceedings o f
National Conference in Sales Management.
Blackshear, T. R. (1998). Adaptive behavior: A literature review and analysis.
Proceedings o f National Conference in Sales Management 62-69.
Boorom, M. L. (1994). Involved listening as a salesperson skill variable and its
impact upon adaptive selling and sales performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University o f South Florida.
Bray, J. H., & Maxwell, S. E. (1985). Multivariate analysis o f variance. In Series:
Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, Beverly Hills: SAGE publications, Inc.
Castleberry, S. B., & Shepherd, C. D. (1993). Effective interpersonal listening and
personal selling. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management 13 (Winter), 35-49.
70
Castleberry, S. B., Shepherd, C. D., & Ridnour, R. E. (1998). Using the WatsonBarker Listening Test to measure salesperson listening. Proceedings o f National
Conference in Sales Management. 147-154.
Churchill, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures o f marketing
constructs. Journal o f Marketing Research. 16 (February). 64-73.
Churchill, G. A., Collins, R., & Strang (1975). Should retail salespersons be
similar to their customers. Journal o f Retailing. 51 (Fall), 29-42.
Churchill, G. A., Ford, N. M., Hartley, S. W & Walker, Jr., O. C. (1985). The
determinants o f salesperson performance: A meta-analysis. Journal o f Marketing
Research. 22 (May), 103-118.
Cole, L. M. (1985). What do you say to a naked doctor? Sales and Marketing
Management. 130 (April), 40.
Comer, L. B., & Drollinger, T. (1996). Androgyny and relationship selling: Some
possible linkages, in National Conference in Sales Management. M.R. Williams (eds.).
Anaheim, CA: 153-155.
Comer, L. B., & Drollinger, T. (1999). Active empathetic listening and selling
success: A conceptual framework. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales Management
(Forthcoming).
Comer, L. B., & Jolson, M. A. (1991). Perceptions o f gender stereotypic behavior.
An exploratory study o f women in selling. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales
Management. 11 (Winer), 35-50.
Comer, L. B., & Nicholls, J. A. F. (1997). The Hispanic salesperson: Some
preliminary propositions. In Diversity in the Sales Force. American Marketing
Association Summer Educator's Conference. Chicago, August 1997.
Cron, W. L., Jackofsky, E. F., & Slocum, J. W. Jr. (1993). Job performance and
attitudes o f disengagement stage salespeople who are about to retire. Journal o f Personal
Selling and Sales Management. 13 (Spring), 1-14.
Daley, K., & Wolfe, E. (1996). Socratic selling: How to ask the questions that get
the sale. Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin.
Dalrymple, D. J., & Cron, W. L. (1995). Sales management: Concepts and cases
(5th ed.l. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
71
Darmon, R. Y. (1998). A conceptual scheme and procedure for classifying sales

positions. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales Management. 18 (Summer). 31-46.
Dawson, L. M. (1992). Will feminization change the ethics o f the sales
profession? Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales M anagement 12 (Winter), 21-32.
Feldstein, P. J. (1998). Health care economics, 3rd ed. Albany, NY: Delmar
publishers Inc.
Ferguson, R. P. (1989). Training the resident to meet the detail men. The Journal
o f the American Medical Association. 2 6 1 .992-993.
Figel, M. (1983). Women in the winners circle. The American Salesman. 28 (6),
3-6.
Fletcher, G. J. O., Danilovics, P., Pemandez, G., Peterson, D., & Reeder, G. D.
(1986). Attributional complexity: An individual difference measure. Journal o f
Personality and Social Psychology. 51 (4), 875-884.
Folland, S., Goodman, A. C., and Stano, M. (1993). The economics o f health and
health care. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Freiman, P.E. (1992). A view from Washington: Good science is expensive. San
Jose Mercury News (April 17, 1992), 7B.
Futrell, C. M. (1992). Fundamentals o f Selline. 4th ed.. Homewood, EL: Irwin.
Gentry, J. W., Mowen, J. D., & Tasaki, L. (1991). Sales person evaluations: A
systematic structure for reducing judgmental bias. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales
Management H (Spring), 27-38.
Giacobbe, R. W. (1991). Adaptive selling behavior and sales performance
effectiveness: A contingency approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State
University.
Goolsby, J. R., Lagace, R., & Boorom, M. (1992). Psychological adaptiveness and
sales performance. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales M anagement 12 (Spring), 5166 .
Gray, B. H. (1991). The profile motive and patient care. Cambridge, MT: Harvard
University press.
Grikscheit G. G. (1971). An investigation o f the ability o f salesmen to monitor
feedback. Unpublished PH. D. dissertation. Michigan State University.
72
Haas, N. (1994). The right medicine, Financial World. 162 (March 30, 1994), 4250.
Henthome, T. L., LaTour, M. S., & Williams, A. J. (1992). Initial impressions in
the organizational buyer-seller dyad: Sales management implications. Journal o f Personal
Selling and Sales Management. 12 (Summer), 57-65.
Huston, P. (1993). Doctors want more industry-sponsored meetings, Medical
Marketing and Media. 2 8 .48-53.
IMS America (1998). Promotional spending 1996-1997. Newsletter, March 1998.
Ingram, T. A., Schwepker, C. H. Jr., & Hutson, D. (1992). Why salespeople fail.
Industrial Marketing Management. 21 (August), 225-230.
Kang, J. & Hillery, J. (1998). Older salespeople's role in retail sales encounters.
Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales Management. 18 (4), 39-54.
Jolson, M. A. (1975). The underestimated potential o f the canned sales
presentation. Journal o f Marketing. 25. 75-78.
Lagace, R. R. & Howe, V. (1988). An evaluation o f the Behrman and Perreault
salesperson performance scale. In Summer Educators Conference Proceedings. Ingene
and Frazier, eds., Chicago, AMA, 313.
Lagace, R. R., & Twibble, J. L. (1990). The androgyny level o f salespeople:
Gooses and ganders, or all geese? Journal o f Social Behavior and Personality. 5
(November), 641-650.
Leong, F. T. L. (1985). Career development o f Asian Americans. Journal o f
College Student Personnel. 26 (November), 539-546.
Leong, S. M., Busch, P. S., & John, D. R. (1989). Knowledge bases and
salesperson effectiveness: A script-theoretic analysis. Journal o f Marketing Research. 26
(May), 164-178.
Lexchin, J. (1989). Doctors and detailers: Therapeutic education or
pharmaceutical promotion? International Journal o f Health Services. 19 (4), 663-679.
Linkemer, B. (1989). Women in sales: What do the really want? Sales and
Marketing Management. 141 (January), 61-65.
73
Manning, G. I. & Reece, B. I. (1990). Selling todav: A personal approach. 4th
edition. Boston, MT: Allyn and Bacon.
Marin, G., & Marin, B. V. (1991). Research with Hispanic Populations. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Marks, R., Vorhies, D. W., & Badovick, G. J. (1996). A psychometric evaluation
o f the ADAPTS scale: A critique and recommendations. Journal o f Personal Selling and
Sales Management. 16 (4), 53-65.
Marshall, G. W., Mowen, J. C., & Fabes, K.. J. (1992). The impact o f territory
difficulty and self versus other ratings on managerial evaluations o f sales personnel.
Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales Management. 12 (4), 35-47.
Marshall, G. W., Stamps, M. B., & Moore, J. N. (1998). Perinterview biases: The
impact o f race, physical attractiveness, and sales job type on preinterview impressions o f
sales job applicants. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales Management. 18 (Fall), 21-38.
McCarthy, E. J., & Perreault, W. D. Jr. (1994). Basic marketing: A managerial
approach (8th ed.). Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
McEvoy, G. M., & Cascio, W. F. (1989). Cumulative evidence o f the relationship
between employee age and job performance. Journal o f Applied Psychology. 74
(February), 11-17.
McMurray, R. N. (1961). The mystique o f super-salesmanship. Harvard Business
Review, (March-April), 113-122.
Meyers-Levey, J., & Maheswaran, D. (1991). Exploring differences in males and
females' processing strategies. Journal o f Consumer Research. 18 (June), 63-70.
Miller, D. T. (1978). What constitutes a self-survey attributional bias? Journal o f
Personality and Social Psychology. 36 (November), 1221 - 1223.
Moncrief, W. C., III (1986). Selling activity and sales position taxonomies for
industrial salesforces. Journal o f Marketing Research. 23 (August). 261-270.
Moore, J. R., Eckrich, D. S., & Carlson, L. T. (1986). A hierarchy o f industrial
selling competencies. Journal o f Marketing Education. 25 (Spring), 79-99.
Morgan, F. W., & Stoltman, J. J. (1990). Adaptive selling - insights from social
cognition. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales M anagement 10 (Fall), 43-54.
74
Mowen, J. C., Fabes, K. J., & LaForge, R. W. (1986). Effects o f effort, territory
situation, and rater on salesperson evaluation. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales
Management. 6 (May), 1-8.
Newton, D. A. (1973). Sales force performance and turnover. Cambridge, MA:
Marketing Science Instititute.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill
Higher Education.
Oberhaus, M. A., Ratliffe, S., & Stauble, V. (1993). Professional selling: A
relationship process. Fort Worth, TX: The Dryden Press.
OHara, B. S., Boles, J. S., & Johnston, M. W. (1991). The influence o f personal
variables on salesperson selling orientation. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales
Management, U. (Winter), 61-67.
Oliver, R. L. (1974). Expectancy theory predictions o f salesmens performance.
Journal o f Marketing Research. 11,243-253.
Pederson, C., Wright, M., & Weitz, B. A. (1984). Selling: Principle and methods.
7th ed. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin Inc.
Peltzman. S. 119741. Regulation o f pharmaceutical innovation. Washington, DC:
American Enterprise Institute.
Pettijohn, C. E., Pettijohn, L. S., Parker, R. S., & Taylor, A. J. (1996). Is adaptive
selling viable behavior? A review o f the literature. Association o f Marketing Theory and
Practice (Soringl.
Pharmaceutical Sales Force Structure & Strategies (1997). Scott Levin, Health
Care Publications.
Porter, S. S. (1997). Salesperson knowledge structure and the practice o f adaptive
selling: An empirical investigation. Proceedings o f National Conference in Sales
Management. 146-151.
Predmore, C. E., & Bonnice, J. G. (1994). Sales success as predicted by a process
measure o f adaptability. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales Management. 14 (Fall). 5563.
Pruden, H. O., & Reece, R. M. (1972). Interorganizational role set relations and
the performance and satisfaction o f industrial salesmen. Administration Science
Quarterly. 17.601-609.
75
Rackham, N. (1988). Spin selling. NY: McGraw-Hill.
Ramsey, R. P., & Sohi, R. S. (1997). Listening to your customers: The impact o f
perceived salesperson listening behavior on relationship outcomes. Journal o f the
Academy o f Marketing Science. 25 (Spring), 127-143.
Rhodes, S. C., Watson, K. W., & Barker, L. L. (1990). Listening assessment:
Trends and influencing factors in the 1980s. Journal o f the International Listening
Association. 4,42-52.
Rubin, R. B., & Roberts, C. V. (1987). A comparative examination and analysis
o f three listening tests. Communication Education. 3 6 .142-153.
Scott-Levin (1996). Promotional Insights, May 1999, p.3.
Shuster, C. P., & Danes, J. E. (1986). Asking questions: Some characteristics o f
successful sales encounters. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales Management. 6 (May),
17-27.
Skolnik, R. (1985). A woman's place is on the sales force. Sales and Marketing
Management. 134 (April), 34-37.
Smith, D., & Owens, J. (1995). Knowledge o f customers customers as a basis for
sales force differentiation. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales Management. 15. 1-15.
Spiro, R. L. & Weitz, B. A. (1990). Adaptive selling: Conceptualization,
measurement, and nomological validity. Journal o f Marketing Research. 27 (February),
61-69.
Sujan, H., Sujan, M., & Bettman, J. R. (1988). Knowledge structure differences
between more effective and less effective salespeople. Journal o f Marketing Research. 25
(February), 64-77.
Szymanski, D. M. (1988). Determinants o f selling effectiveness: The importance
o f declarative knowledge to the personal selling concept. Journal o f Marketing. 52
(January), 64-77.
Szymanski, D. M., & Churchill, G. A. Jr. (1990). Client evaluation cues: A
comparison o f successful and unsuccessful salespeople. Journal o f Marketing Research.
27 (May), 64-77.
Tanner, J. F. (1994). Adaptive selling at trade shows. Journal o f Personal Selling
and Sales Management. 14 (2), 15-24.
76
Thomas, HI, J. (1989). National survey o f recent changes in hospital policies on
pharmaceutical sales representatives activities. American Journal o f Hospital Pharmacy.
46, 565-569.
Thurston, J. L., Lennon, S., & Clayton, R. (1990). Influence o f age, body type,
fashion and garment typed on women's professional image. Home Economics Research
Journal. 19 (December), 139-150.
Waldo, D. R., Levit, K. R., & Lazenby, H. (1986). National health expenditures,
1985. Health Care Financing Review. 8 (1), 3-8.
Walker, O. C., Jr., Churchill, G. A., Jr., & Ford, N. M. (1977). Motivation and
performance in industrial selling: Present knowledge and needed research. Journal of
Marketing Research. 1 4 .156-168.
Watson, D. (1982). The actor and the observer: How are their perceptions o f
causality divergent? Psychological Bulletin. 92 November), 682-700.
Waud, D. (1992). Pharmaceutical promotions A free lunch? The New England
Journal o f Medicine. 327. 351-353.
Weilbaker, D. C. (1990). The identification o f selling abilities needed for
missionary types sales. Journal o f Personal Selling and Sales Management. JO (Summer),
45-58.
Weitz, B. A. (1981). Effectiveness in sales interactions: A contingency
framework. Journal o f Marketing. 45 (Winter), 85-103.
Weitz, B. A. (1978). The relationship between salesperson performance and
understanding o f customer decision making. Journal o f Marketing Research. 15
(November), 501-516.
Weitz, B. A., Castleberry, S. B., & Tanner, J. F. (1998). Selling: Building
relationships. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Weitz, B. A., Sujan, H., & Sujan, M. (1986). Knowledge, motivation, and
adaptive behavior: A framework for improving selling effectiveness. Journal o f
Marketing. 50 (October). 161-173.
Willett, R. P., & Pennington, A. L. (1966). Customer and salesman: The anatomy
o f choice and influence in a retail setting. Fall Educators Conference. Chicago, IL:
American Marketing Association, 598-616.
77
Wilson, G. J. (1990). Training sales reps 1990s style. Medical Marketing and
Media. 25, 17-28.
Wolfe, H. D., & Albaum, G. (1962). Inequality in products, orders, customers,
salesmen, and sales territories, Journal o f Business. 35 (July), 298-301.
APPENDICES
78
Appendix A. 1 Cover Letter
Dear Sales Representative,

I am a graduate student at Purdue University and I am currently conducting a research
study which is required for the completion o f my Ph.D. degree in Consumer Economics.
Your name has been randomly selected as one o f the participants in this survey. This
survey is designed to study the manner in which salespeople and their customers relate to
each other. It will take approximately IS minutes o f your time.
All o f your responses will be kept strictly confidential and will not be shared with
management o f your company. No individual responses but statistics related to the entire
pool o f participants will be reported. Because only a very limited pool o f participants
have been selected, your participation is very important to my study. Please send your
responses back to me in the enclosed postage-paid envelope.
In return for your cooperation, a summary o f the study will be available for interested
participants. If you would like to receive a copy, please send your business card, either
with the questionnaire or in a separate envelope. We will be happy to send it to you
when the study is complete.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Lucy Zhong
Ph.D. Candidate
79
Appendix A.2 Sales Representatives Questionnaire
SALES REPRESENTATIVES
QUESTIONNAIRE
Please think about the way you relate to your customers during your sales calls and
respond to each o f the following items by writing the appropriate number before each.
We would ask you to be as honest as possible in your responses. It is very important
that you answer all the questions!
I.
Using a scale o f from 1 to 7 describe to what extent you agree with the
following statements related to the interaction between you and your customers:
1
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Neither
Somewhat
Agree nor
Agree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Each customer requires a unique approach.

When I feel that my sales approach is not working, I can easily change to another.
I like to experiment with different sales approaches.
I am very flexible in the selling approach I use.
I feel that most buyers can be dealt with pretty much in the same manner.
I don't change my approach from one customer to another.
I can easily use a wide variety of selling approaches.
I use a set sales approach.
80
It is easy for me to modify my sales presentation in the situation calls for it.
Basically I use the same approach with most customers.
I am very sensitive to the needs of my customers.
I find it difficult to adapt my presentation style to certain buyers.
I vary my sales style from situation to situation.
I try to understand how one customer differs from another.
I feel confident that I can effectively change my planned presentation when necessary.
I treat all of my buyers pretty much the same.
II.
Please respond to the following items regarding the importance of product

knowledge:
1
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Neither
Somewhat
Agree nor
Agree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
I possess product knowledge more than I am expected to know.

I spend above average time on obtaining product knowledge.
Sales training and launch meetings provide me with sufficient knowledge of my
company's products.
I am familiar with the pricing of my company's products as well as that of our competitors.
I have a good understanding of my companys product line.
I think it's not important to know competitor's products.
I am familiar with all the clinical side effects of my companys products.
III.
Please indicate how you present sales messages to your customers:

1
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Neither
Somewhat
Agree nor
Agree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Before the sales call I attempt to gather as much information as possible about my clients.
I can verbally convey sales messages well to my customers.
I speak clearly and understandably.
81
I vary the pace of my speech when I give sales presentations.

Within very limited interacting time, sometimes my sales messages do not get across to my
customers.
My clients always actively participate in my presentations.
Gestures and nonverbal symbols help me a lot with my presentations.
Visual aids (sales aids) are frequently used in my presentations.
IV.
Please respond to the following items concerning the way you listen to your
customers:
1
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Neither
Somewhat
Agree nor
Agree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree

I don't appear to be bored to my customers
I ask for more details from my customers.
I paraphrase my customer's questions to better understand what they are asking.
I use full sentences in my responses rather than yeses and nos.
I offer relevant information to my customers questions.
I answer my customers questions at appropriate times.
82
V.
Please rate yourself against your peers:

1
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Neither
Somewhat
Agree nor
Agree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree

I identify and sell to major accounts in my territory.
I exceed all sales targets and objectives for my territory during the year.
I generate a high level of dollar sales.
I achieve sales call goals.
I achieve market share goals.
I achieve sales goals.
I achieve overall goals.
VI.
Please describe how you communicate with your customers:

1
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Neither
Somewhat
Agree nor
Agree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Before each sales call I always prepare a list of questions to ask my clients.
I always ask my clients whether they have questions about my presentations.
I always know what my clients' needs are from their questions.
I seldom get questions from my clients.
I can easily start a "small talk with my clients.
I tend to ask more open-ended questions and fewer closed-ended questions.
Frequently I dont have time to ask my clients in-depth questions.
83
VII.
Use a scale from 0 to 10 where 10 indicates you are the best in your company
and 0 indicates that you are the w orst C rcle the appropriate number:
Your adaptive selling ability
i.
10
Your product knowledge
10
Your presentation skills
10
Your listening skills
10
Your questioning skills
10
Your sales performance
10
VIII. Please respond to the followingquestions about yourself:

1.
In what year were you bom?_____
2.
What is your gender?
3.
What is your education?

Less than High School Graduate
High School Graduate
Some College
College Graduate
Post Graduate Work
Graduate Degree
6.
How long have you been in sales?
7.
Approximately how long do your sales calls last?____ Minutes
Male_____ Female
Years_____Months
84
Appendix A.3 Review o f Sales Performance Measures
Based on literature, there are four types o f measures for sales performance
(Behrman & Perreault, 1982; Churchill, Ford, Hartley, & Walker, 1985; Churchill, 1979).
First, quantitative measures such as dollar sales or sales volume appear to be the most
objective and logical measures o f sales performance. Yet there can be problems with
these kinds o f measures. For example, inequality across different sales territories and
product lines often exists (Wolfe & Albaum, 1962). Thus quantitative data that appear to
be objective may suggest differences in performance that may not be accountable by
individual factors. However, it is possible to develop different measures to avoid the
aforementioned problems to a large extent. For example, new accounts instead o f current
sale volume; market share instead o f product sales and conversion rates can be used.
Another problem may associate with quantitative measure is team selling and
missionary selling. The problem with team selling is that the whole team is working on
the same prospect or same group o f prospects. Therefore, it is difficult to associate
outcomes with an individual. In historical missionary selling, it was impossible to
measure outcomes due to difficulty in data collection. For example, in the
pharmaceutical industry, physician level data was not available. Over time the
computerized databases for collection o f prescriptions expanded to more and more
pharmacies. Up to date, about 80% o f the pharmacies have been captured in the national
database and a projection has been made to represent the whole country.
85
The second measure is to use evaluations by sales managers. The advantage is it
can tackle the problems encountered in quantitative measures. However, salespeople
operate across organizational boundaries and the manager may have little firsthand
knowledge about what the salesperson does to represent the company, other than what
shows up in final reports. Furthermore, the managers evaluation can be biased upward
upon personal relationships with the salesperson.
A conceptual framework developed by Gentry, Mo wen and Tasaki (1991) argues
that managers take decision-making short cuts by using judgmental heuristics that may
lead to sub-optimal outcomes. Therefor aggressive salespeople will receive more
extreme ratings than more passive individuals because the information will be more
available. A sales manager who is relatively unfamiliar with the salesperson will
attribute a poor performance to the person, while a sales manager more familiar with the
salesperson will attribute a poor performance to the situation. The also suggest that
evaluation processes based in part on the manager's recall o f specific situations are likely
to results in biases in the judgment o f perceived performance.
The third measure is ratings from customers. Afterall, the satisfaction or behavior
of buyers determines the successfiilness o f a salesperson. The limitation o f this approach
may be that customers perception o f performance may vary substantially but only a
limited subset o f the data can be collected from one group o f customers.
The fourth measure o f sales performance is self-reports from salespeople. A
salesperson knows all facets o f a sales job and his/her customers. Therefore, a complete
evaluation can be expected. The problem associated with this measure is that salespeople
86
may make socially acceptable responses or tend to be overly generous when rating
their own performance.
Researchers have attempted to empirically investigate the relationship between
sales manager and salesperson evaluations (Mowen, Fabes & LaForge, 1986; Watson,
1982). It has been proposed that sales managers will tend to attribute the causes o f the
salespeople's behavior to personal factors. In contrast, the salesperson is likely to
attribute the causes o f his or her behavior to situation factors (Watson, 1982). Miller
(1978) has also suggested the existence o f a self-serving attributional bias. Salespeople
tend to rate themselves higher than would the sales manager.
However, the study by Mowen, Fabes and LaForge (1986) did not find evidence
o f divergence between sales manager and salesperson evaluations. The researchers
attributed the student convenience sample and role-playing as the main reasons for being
not significant results. Another study by Marshall, Mowen and Fabes (1992) revisited
this issue. In their study, real sales managers and salespeople were utilized instead o f
students. They found that salespeople gave themselves significantly higher performance
scores.
One way to cope with the inflated ratings by salespeople themselves is to use
anonymous approach. The anonymous or confidential approach in data collection should
provide minimum incentive for a respondent to give inflated ratings. Hopefully this will
eliminate or decrease the inconsistencies between salesperson and sales manager
evaluations.
Pruden and Reece (1972) developed a self-rating scale. This measure is easy to
administer and has been used in other studies. However, reliability on the scale is
87
unknown because this was a single item scale. Additionally self-evaluation may be
strongly biased by salesperson's perception o f what he or she does well, not by a balanced
perspective o f performance.
Behrman and Perreault (1982) developed a self-rating scale with 31 items.
Reliability was checked. All o f the alpha coefficients, which provide estimates of
internal reliability, are over .75. Additionally, a test-retest reliability was evaluated by
administering a second-wave questions. The test-retest correlation was .70. In their
study, validity was checked by correlating self-ratings with manager's evaluations. Four
out o f the five items were found to be significantly correlated. Internal quantitative data
was also available from the companies in their study. A salesperson's sales index was
found to be significantly correlated with salesperson's overall self-ratings.
Researchers have suggested that different measures offer different advantages and
disadvantages (Behrman & Perreault, 1982; Churchill et al., 1985). There is no basis for
generalizations that a particular type o f performance measure is better than others.
Different measures may complement each other.
Table A.1 summarizes o f the four measures based on Behrman and Perreault
(1982) and Churchill et al. (1985).
88
Table A. I
Comparison o f Measures in Sales Performance
Advantages
Limitations
Overcome Limitations
I. Quantitative measure
reliable
logical
inequality across territories adjustments

ineaualitv across oroducts relative measure (market share)
II. Evaluation by sales managers

complete
fair across territory
little firsthand knowledge

biased view
III. Evaluation by customers

fair
comnrehensive
limited sample
sampling methods
IV. Self-ratings
conclusive o f all aspects inflated ratings
upward bias
easv to administer
anonymous
89
Appendix A.4 Review o f Adaptability Measures
The scales to be used for testing the relationship between adaptability and
performance may also play an important role in obtaining final conclusions. Spiro and
Weitz (1990) developed a 16-item scale to measure adaptability. The reliability
(cronbach alpha) o f the scale was .85. The validity o f the scale was then tested. It was
reported that the correlations with eight other measures o f interpersonal flexibility such as
sensitivity to others, androgyny, empathetic concern and social self-confidence were
significant at p<.00l. However, their findings on relationship between adaptability and
performance were not conclusive. Among the two measures o f performance,
salesperson's self-assessment was significantly related to adaptability. However, the
other measure management ratings o f performance was not significantly related to
adaptability.
Generally speaking, researchers who used the original scale developed by
Spiro and Weitz (1990) concluded that there was either a weak relationship between
adaptive behavior and performance or none at all. Marks, Vorhies, and Badovick (1996)
suggest that the reason that the ADAPTS scale developed by Spiro and Weitz (1990)
demonstrated mixed results for establishing a direct relationship between adaptive selling
and sales success is that the scale is not unidimensional. They attempted to improve the
ADAPTS scale by evaluating the psychometric properties o f the scaling instruments.
Their study suggests that taking all 16 ADAPTS items and summing them in the
traditional manner confound findings because the ADAPTS scale is not unidimensional.
90
After performing a serious o f confirmatory factor analyses, they found that
instead o f one adaptive selling construct, two constructs (adaptive selling beliefs and
adaptive selling behaviors) are represented by the ADAPTS items. While adaptive
selling beliefs did not influence salesperson performance directly, adaptive selling
behaviors was significantly related to performance. They propose that beliefs often
influence behavior, but do not always have a direct effect on the outcome o f a given
transaction. As a result, the relationship between adaptive selling beliefs and sales
performance is likely to be moderated by factors such as the nature o f the sales situation
and/or the nature o f the product itself. Measuring adaptive selling behaviors appears to
be a more valid approach to predicting sales performance. In fact, the behavioral
component developed in this research was significantly related to sales performance and
outperformed the original ADAPTS scale (Spiro & Weitz, 1990) by explaining 11
percent o f the variance in self-rated performance compared to 9 percent o f the variance in
the 1990 study. Therefore, the present study intends to use the modified version o f
ADAPTS scale with both the behavior construct and belief construct.
91
Appendix A.5 Review o f Listening Skill Measures
The measurement o f listening skill is an area that has been investigated and
debated by researchers. Castleberry and Shepherd (1993) compared three widely
recognized and used scales o f listening skill Imeasurement in the communications
literature: the Kentucky Comprehensive Listening Test (KCLT), the Watson-Barker
Listening Test (WBLT), and the Communication Competency Assessment Instrument
(CCAI).
In the KCLT, subjects listen to a message through audiotape and then answer a set
o f multiple choice questions designed to measure:
1)
short term listening,
2)
short term listening with rehearsal,
3)
interpretation or understanding,
4)
lecture listening,
5)
distractions.
The WBLT uses videotape instead o f audiotape. The set o f multiple choice
questions measure:
1)
evaluating message content,
2)
understanding meaning in conversation,
3)
understanding and remembering information,
92
4)
evaluating emotional meanings in messages,
5)
following instructions and directions.
Similar to the WBLT, the third test, CCAI, uses a videotape message followed by
a series o f multiple choice questions. But it was specifically developed to identify
communication problems for students in an educational setting.
Rubin and Roberts (1987) examined the KCLT, the WBLT, and CCAI tests and
concluded that CCAI would not be appropriate in non-college settings. It was also
suggested that the CCAI was too broad to serve just as a listening test (Rhodes, Watson,
& Barker, 1990). The other scale, KCLT, was criticized as unrealistic in real personal
selling situations. The test emphasizes on lecture listening, while neglecting
comprehension, which is more important in selling. The distraction section was also
criticized as being too distracting.
Without the aforementioned shortcomings, the WBLT appears to be an
appropriate test for salespeople beyond simple classroom listening. Additionally, the
dimensions in the test are very well suited for a study o f listening in a personal selling
environment (Castleberry & Shepherd, 1993). Furthermore, compared to the other tests,
the WBLT is quicker to administer and also easy to score. The test uses videotape
messages, followed by questions about the messages. Each o f the five listening skills is
evaluated with ten questions, for a total o f fifty questions on the 40-minute test.
Table A.2 summarizes the major issues o f these three tests.
93
Table A.2
Comparison o f Listening Tests
KCLT
WBLT
CCAI
audiotape
unrealistic
lecture listening
no cmprehension
videotape
message evaluation
information comprehension
relatively quicker to administer
videotape
college settings only
KCLT: Kentucky Comprehensive Listening Test

WBLT: Watson-Barker Listening Test
CCAI: Communication Competency Assessment Instrument.
Source: Castleberry & Shepherd, 1993.
Castleberry and Shepherd (1993) administered a Watson-Barker Listening Test.

In their study, they could not find any significant relationship between the WBLT and
any o f the key constructs (i.e., sales expertise, adaptive selling, performance, job
satisfaction, and overall selling experience). It appears that simply using a generic
listening test, such as the WBLT, may not be adequate approach to measuring listening
skills in the personal selling context. As a result, the authors recommended multiple
approaches to assessing listening skills o f salespeople. One o f the approaches is to
develop paper and pencil tests for salesperson self-evaluations o f listening skills.
Comer and Drollinger (1996) developed a series o f items from the descriptors o f
effective listening behaviors by Castleberry and Shepherd (1993). To confirm the
importance o f these items, they searched six major personal selling textbooks to verify
that each o f the items was recognized as a characteristic o f good listening. Cronbach's
alpha was .64 with the original 13 items. By eliminating 5 items, Cronbach's alpha
increased to .72.
94
Ramsey and Sohi (1997) developed a scale for salesperson listening behavior
based on a sample o f new car buyers. Listening was conceptualized as a higher-order
construct consisting o f three factors: sensing, evaluating, and responding. The sensing
component was measured by four items that assessed the customer's perception o f the
degree to which a salesperson sensed the incoming stimuli (coefficient alpha = .80). The
evaluating component was measured by five items that assessed customer perceptions o f
the degree to which a salesperson assigned meaning to the message (coefficient alpha =
0.64). The responding dimension was measured by four items that assessed customer
perceptions o f the extent to which a salesperson developed and displayed an appropriate
reaction to the message (coefficient alpha = 0.91).
To validate the results, salespeople were also asked to do a self-assessment o f their
listening skills with scales appropriately modified. T-tests showed no significant
differences between the customer scores and the salespeople scores on any o f the three
dimensions, suggesting that the customers' perceptions o f listening behavior were in
agreement with salespeople's self-perception. This scale will be used in the current study.
VITA
95
VITA
Xiang Yuan Zhong was bom on Oct. 29,1964 in Hunan, China. She attended
China Textile University, Shanghai where she graduated with a Bachelors o f Engineering
in Mechanical Engineering. After graduation, she worked in a textile research institute
for 2 years. From 1988 to 1989 Xiang Yuan was a visiting scholar in Leeds University in
the United Kingdom, studying patent rights and trade relations. In 1990 she started her
graduate study at the Department o f Consumer Sciences and Retailing in Purdue
University and received her Masters o f Science degree in Consumer Behavior in 1992.
In 1995 she started working as a Financial Analyst in NationsBank, Charlotte. In 1997
she transferred to Glaxo, a pharmaceutical company. Currently she is a Senior Analyst in
Marketing Analysis at GlaxoSmithKline Inc. In May 2001, Xiang Yuan completed her
doctoral requirements and received her doctorate in Consumer Economics.

Personal Selling: The Relationship Between Selling Ability and Sales Performance

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Personal Selling: The Relationship Between Selling Ability and Sales Performance

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

INFORMATION TO USERS

copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

Higher quality 6 x 9 black and white

photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing

ProQuest Information and Learning

G ndutt Scfeool Fans 9

BETWEEN SELLING ABILITY AND SALES PERFORMANCE

For the degree of

Signed bvihe final examini

not to be regarded as confidential.

Format Approved by:

PERSONAL SELLING: THE RELATIONSHIP

Xiang Yuan Zhong

In Partial Fulfillment o f the

UMI Number. 3037674

ProQuest Information and Learning Company

Purpose o f the Study...........................................................................................

CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW.....................................................................

CHAPTER 3 - METHODOLOGY, continued

CHAPTER 4 - RESULTS AND DISCUSSION..........................................................

CHAPTER 5 - CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS..........................................

Implications for Practitioners............................................................................

LIST OF REFEREN CES...............................................................................................

Importance o f Types o f Selling A bility......................................................

Situations Under Which Adaptability is Important...................................

Measures o f Variables .................................................................................

Content Analysis on Items from the Knowledge Scale

Content Analysis on Items from the Presentation Skills S c a le ...............

Content Analysis on Items from the Questioning Skills S c a le ...............

Factor Analysis o f Self-Rating Performance S cale..................................

Factor Analysis o f Adaptability Scale ......................................................

Factor Analysis o f Product Knowledge S cale...........................................

Factor Analysis o f Presentation Skills Scale ............................................

Factor Analysis o f Listening Skills S c a le .................................................

Listening Scale: Comparison with Ramsey and Sohis Results .............

Factor Analysis o f Questioning Skills S cale.............................................

Multiple Regression Results o f All Independent V ariables.....................

Multiple Regression Results o f All F acto rs..............................................

Influences o f Demographic Variables........................................................

Comparison o f Measures in Sales Performance .......................................

Comparison o f Listening T e s ts ..................................................................

Personal selling is o f primary importance to the success o f most businesses.

Source: Pharmaceutical Sales Force Structure & Strategies (1997)

Given the expense o f PSRs to pharmaceutical companies, PSRs are expected to be

Purpose o f the Study

Contributions to Consumer Economics Research

Contributions to Personal Selling Literature

Organization o f This Study

CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW

abilities and their successfulness in sales interactions conducted by Weilbaker (1990).

Salespeople Managers Physicians Sum of Ranks

Source: Weilbaker (1990).

Spiro & Weitz (1992)

1. The buying center

4. Consumer goods/industrial goods

Are these moderating factors relevant to pharmaceutical sales? Based on previous

high for "buyers" physicians and patients. Physicians have to be knowledgeable of

In summary, salesperson knowledge has been found to have a significant impact

occurs. Based on previous research and conceptual thought listening skills o f

Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses

S ales Perform ance

Figure 2.1. Conceptual Framework.

Other Influencing Factors