SALES FORCE CONTROL SYSTEMS:

A REVIEW OF MEASUREMENT PRACTICES

AND PROPOSED SCALE REFINEMENTS

GROUP 1
INTRODUCTION

 Research on sales force has prominent role because they form an

important section
 Ambiguity exists in measurement scales
 The BCCS is prominent among them.
 This study seeks to critically evaluate and cross-validate the measurement
properties of the BCCS(Babakus and colleagues control system)
 Three different samples examined
 The operationalization of the BCCS is not consistent across studies.
 The number of items comprising the scale varies greatly across studies.
 The operationalization of the BCCS is not consistent across studies
 The assessment of scale uni-dimensionality and factor structure is done by means
of a factor analysis that is exploratory in nature.
 Reliability assessment is carried out by calculating Cronbach’s alpha coeffi cient
despite the acknowledgment that it is a poor measure of a scale’s
reliability
 Efforts directed at evaluating measurement model fit and construct
(discriminant and convergent) validity are limited
 All previous studies assess the scale’s nomological validity by relying on
a single data source; thus, it is possible that results may have been inflated
or deflated due to common method bias
 Sales Force Control Systems and the
BCCS Scale
 ANDERSON AND OLIVER (1987)- Conceptualize the SFC system as
“an organization’s set of procedures for monitoring, directing evaluating,
and compensating its employees
 They propose that control systems can be viewed along a continuum
anchored by two strategies
1. Outcome control- manager work closely and monitor the activities
and results of salespeople, and coach them in an effort to guide them
in carrying out their tasks.
2. Behaviour control- sales managers do not closely work with
salespeople who are largely left alone to decide on the strategies and
processes that will help them achieve the desired results
 Sales Force Control Systems and the BCCS
Scale

 JAWORSKI (1988)- )- Conceptualize the SFC system as set of activities designed to

increase the probability that specified plans are implemented properly and desired
outcomes are achieved.
 Jaworski also proposes that controls can be described by their degree of formality,
thereby suggesting two general forms of controls
1. Formal controls- process and output controls- written, management-initiated
mechanisms designed to influence the probability that marketing personnel will
behave in ways that support the stated objectives
2. Informal controls- (i.e., professional and self-control) unwritten, typically worker-
initiated mechanisms designed to influence the behaviour of marketing personnel.
 Sales Force Control Systems and the BCCS
Scale
 Babakus and colleagues (1996)- operationalized SFC as a second-order construct, which is
measured by means of a scale including 25 items that are reflected around four dimensions—
monitoring, directing, evaluating, and rewarding.
 Monitoring dimension- consist 8 activities- taps the extent to which sales managers spend time
with salespeople in the field, degree to which salespeople travel, and call
 Directing dimension- consist 5 activities- discuss the performance evaluations with salespeople
and training them on the job develop potential
 Evaluating dimension – consist of 5 activities- taps the extent to which sales managers evaluate
salespeople on the basis of objective (input and output) and subjective criteria
 Rewarding dimension- consist of 8 activities- taps the extent to which managers tie financial
and nonfinancial incentives with qualitative and quantitative achievements
Critical Evaluation of the BCCS Scale—
Literature Review

 While research, a total of 24 studies was found that has used a variant form of
the BCCS scale
 The scale has been employed in studies conducted across geographical
contexts (i.e., Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America) and across almost
every industrial sector (i.e., consumer goods, industrial goods, services).
 For a basis for evaluating the BCCS scale, here they have structured
discussion around four themes- internal consistency(reliability), factor
structure (dimensionality), construct validity, and modifications of the original
scale.
SUMMARY ON BCCS

 The analysis indicates adequate degree of internal consistency

 Question remain concerning the dimensional purity of the BCCS as well as
 The validity of a second-order factor structure.
 Finally, the frequent ad hoc modifications to shorten the BCCS scale suggest that
a short version would be useful.
RESEARCH METHOD

 3 sample research design involving three independent studies among sales

organizations operating in Greece
 Study 1 (calibration study) is involved with the initial assessment and revision
of the BCCS instrument.
 Studies 2 and 3 (validation studies) are used to cross-validate the revised scale
RESEARCH METHOD

 Sampling objective
 Including the perceptions of every constituent in a sales organization
 To alleviate concerns for common method bias effects in prior SFC
work,- for this they extended study to 3 sectors
 Include a broader range of companies in terms of size, since company
size influence the evaluation criteria
Study 1

 To gather responses from salespeople representing different sales positions

three different industrial sectors—
a) ethical pharmaceutical industry : missionary sales forces
b) food and beverages industry : key account sellers within the food and
beverages industry
c) electrical/machinery industry: consultative salespeople
 442 sales managers ( 60,62,320)
 One hundred and thirty-four agreed to participate in the study (30 percent overall
response rate)
 878 usable responses from salespersons working in all 134 participating companies
 The results indicate that the type of sales job does not have any signifi cant effect on the
summated 25item BCCS scale
Study 2

 Data collection strategy for this study had three main objective:
1. responses were gathered from Chief Sales Executives in an attempt
to include the perceptions of a different group of respondents than
those in study
2. industrial sectors were chosen to reflect a broader range of business
environments
3. companies were selected within industries so that small (10–49
employees), medium-sized (50–99 employees), and large (over 100
employees)
 On the basis of nine product characteristics :
 unit value,
 technical complexity,
 frequency of purchase,
 signifi cance of each individual purchase to the consumer,
 time and effort spent purchasing by consumers,
 rate of technological change,
 consumer need for service,
 rapidity of consumption,
 extent of usage
 classified companies into five groups:
 (1) fast-moving consumer goods (e.g., food, cosmetics, detergents) (2)
industrial supplies (e.g., information services)
 (3) consumer durables (e.g., furnishings, apparel)
 (4) industrial components and equipment (plastics, chemicals)
 (5) major capital equipment (electronics, electrical equipment,
machinery).
 The companies included in the sample were drawn from a population of 2,878
companies and were stratified by industry group and size
 Companies were randomly selected from each of the five industry groups
 The selection of companies from each size stratum was based on a variable sampling
fraction
 CSEs were selected as key informants
 Sales executives had an average tenure in sales management positions of 10.7 years.
Study 3

 The sampling plan for study 3 was to include the perceptions of

salespeople from a wide range of industries to examine the stability of the
BCCS scale across a different group of respondents than those employed
in studies 1 and 2.
 Sample of 15 firms from industries participated in study 3
 Questionnaires were distributed by CSEs to all their respective
salespeople.
 The sample can be described as follows:
 The majority of the respondents were male and most were younger than
age 39 .
 With respect to job tenure, approximately 36.7 percent of the sample had
been with the company less than two years, and 21.9 percent had been
with the sales organization more than seven years.
 Regarding experience, 44.5 percent of the sample had more than seven
years of sales-related experience, and most of them were either single
(43.8 percent) or married with children (35.9 percent).
 Most salespeople (69.5 percent) had a university or college degree.
ANALYTICAL STRATEGY AND RESULTS

Reducing the Length of a Scale

 Reduction in the number of items comprising a multi-item measurement scale has
been frequently employed in the sales literature
 This trend is neither ignorable nor accidental. In fact, it may reflect the natural desire
among sales researchers for shorter measurement scales in light of the
 (1) fact that a survey typically involves the measurement of many constructs within
the same instrument
 (2) respondents’ fatigue that lowers data quality
 (3) heightened concerns from participating organizations for long academic surveys
that consume valuable work time
 Stanton et al. (2002) reviewed the literature on scale reduction and provided a set of
criteria that can be employed in shortening a scale.
 They categorize the criteria as internal, external, and judgmental.
 Internal criteria refer to properties of items that can be assessed in reference to other
items on the scale or in reference to scale’s summated scores (i.e., internal
consistency).
 External criteria refer to connections between the scale (or its individual items) and
other constructs or indicators (i.e., nomological validity)
 Judgmental criteria refer to those issues that require subjective judgment (i.e.,
representativeness, avoidance of redundancy).
 To retain or eliminate items from the BCCS scale:
 Pertaining to internal criteria
(1) the corrected item-total correlations
(2) corrected item-subscale correlations
(3) the average number of times that each item was implicated in high standardized
residuals (> |2.58|) in each CFA
(4) the average number of times that each item was implicated in strong cross-loadings on
a different dimension in each CFA (modification index > 5.0 )
 Regarding the external criteria, we calculated (1) the average item criterion correlation
with all criterion variables(2) the number of times a particular item had one of the 12
highest correlations with a criterion (among the 25 items comprising the BCCS scale).
 Finally, regarding the judgmental criteria, evaluate the face validity of each item in terms
of its representativeness with regard to (1) the SFC construct in general and (2) the
dimension to which it is assigned in particular.
Dimensionality Assessment

 In developing a comprehensive measure of SFC systems, one key issue involves

understanding its underlying structure.
 This is critical both from a theoretical and a methodological standpoint.
 First, though Anderson and Oliver (1987) describe the four dimensions of an SFC as
interrelated, previous studies employing the BCCS scale have not unambiguously
provided a clear factor structure (see the preceding discussion).
 Second, in their seminal article, Gerbing and Anderson (1988) recommend
comparing the fit of the proposed measurement model (i.e., four-dimension model)
with several alternative models.
 To determine the best-fitting measurement model, the fits are compared:
 (1) a one-factor model (model A), in which no distinctions were made among the
dimensions of the control system
 (2) a four-factor first-order model (model B), in which the four dimensions were not
allowed to correlate with each other, thereby testing whether the dimensions are
orthogonal
 (3) a four-factor first-order model (model C), in which the four dimensions were
allowed to correlate with each other
 (4) a four-factor model (model D), in which the control system was operationalized
as a second-order construct
 It is important to note that using CFA techniques in our study is more appropriate than
exploratory factor analysis (EFA) for two reasons.
 First, given that we had several competing factor structures, using CFA allowed us to
directly test these competing models. Thus, conclusions are based not only on the
absolute fit of one model but also on the relative fit of alternative models.
 Second, as models are specified a priori when using CFA, researchers are less likely to
capitalize on chance, as they often are with EFA
Reliability and Validity Assessment

 The internal consistency of the BCCS-SV was assessed through construct reliability
estimates (Fornell and Larcker 1981).
 The reliability estimates for the second-order control scale ranged from 0.89 to 0.92
across studies, indicating good reliability.
 Convergent validity for the second-order control scale was evaluated by examining both
the significance of the t-values and the average variance extracted (AVE)
 Discriminant validity was tested by means of Fornell and Larcker’s criteria, whereby the
AVE for a construct indicator is compared with the shared variance between the
construct and the other variables in the study.
 The results of this criterion, which is generally considered the most stringent test,
indicate discriminant validity, as the AVE for each of the scales was greater than the
shared variance between the construct and all other variables
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

 By employing a three-sample research design and based on a large number of

B2B sales organizations from various industries, we sought to validate and
revise the BCCS instrument.
 When SFC is not the central focus of a study, the general factor can be used as
a single variable. However, when SFC is the central focus, the four
dimensions can be assessed separately in order to gain a more fine-grained
understanding of control effects.
 Second-order factor structure of the
BCCS-SV

 It has four dimensions serving as reflective indicators of a higher-order

control construct.
 The four dimensions are interrelated and collectively describe an SFC
system.
 The structure is also consistent with the conceptualization of most
multidimensional constructs in organizational.
 Moreover, it measures each of the four dimensions with a few sets of
items, a situation that balances both “bandwidth” and “fidelity”.
 Thus, the second-order structure could provide researchers with a great
deal of flexibility.
 Explanations attributed to the inconclusive
results of the present study:
 First, our findings resonate well with the mixed results of previous investigations regarding the
relationship between behavior control and salesperson characteristics and performance.
 Second, the fact that responses (in study 1) were gathered from two different data sources may have
deterred the effects of common method bias, which may seriously inflate or deflate relationships among
constructs of interest.
 Third, the insignificant effect of SFC on performance in study 3 may be explained, in part, by the fact
that salespeople’s responses were nested within each sales unit, a situation that might have resulted in
non-independence. Thus, it appears that non-independence is not a matter of concern for the two
outcome variables (performance and commitment).
 Finally, the cultural context in which the three studies were conducted might have also influenced the
nomological network of relationships.
Reasons behind Usefulness of BCCS-SV

1. A short form of the BCCS instrument would take up less space on a survey instrument,
allowing researchers to include additional measures of other constructs on the same
questionnaire.
2. If a long form of the control measure is the only one available, the researcher may be
forced to forego measurement of a control system to keep the survey at a reasonable
length or may develop ad hoc measures of a control system of unknown validity.
3. The stable itemization of the BCCS-SV possesses face validity by capturing every
aspect of the SFC system. In particular, the shortened version captures every activity of
sales management as described by control theorists.
4. Each of the four BCCS’s dimensions contains at least three items, thereby representing
an advancement over previous studies, which employed one or two items in a given
dimension.
5. Operationalization of the BCCS-SV provides evidence for a second-order factor
structure, a finding that accords well with conceptual definitions of a control system.
6. Unlike previous work, we found excellent support for a higher-order structure of the
control system construct.
7. The internal consistency reliability of the BCCS scale is uniformly high across samples;
the average alpha coefficient is 0.86, higher than the average reliability in previous studies.
 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
DIRECTIONS

 First, given that scale development is always an iterative process, additional

evaluation of the BCCS-SV is needed in other countries to validate its
generalizability. Work should be carried out in countries such as the United
Kingdom and the United States.
 Second, further assessment of its face validity is needed. Specifically, employing
scale experts to evaluate the BCCS-SV could provide important insights.
 Third, in spite of the good psychometric properties of the second-order factor
structure, additional research is needed that will improve measurement quality at
the dimension level.
 Fourth, there is an alarming need to triangulate the nomological validity of the
BCCS-SV by employing multiple data sources.
 Fifth, significant changes in the operation of the sales organization have been occurring
during the last decade, the most important being the escalated importance attached to
customer relationship management (CRM) strategies. Thus, there may be a need to
refine the control system concept with sales management activities that are associated
with CRM strategies
 Sixth, it is highly possible that the use of SFC and the measurement properties of the
BCCS scale will vary across different types of selling jobs. Therefore, future research
should investigate this interesting issue by measuring and comparing the BCCS across
different types of selling jobs.
 Finally, although the BCCS scale is an important measure of SFC systems, other
measures deserve attention as well.
THANK YOU