Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate how salesperson’s emotional intelligence (EI) influences salesperson behaviors (i.e. emotional labor strategies) and the influence these behavioral strategies have on customer’s outcomes. Design/methodology/approach The study develops a conceptual model using past literature and tests hypotheses using a salesperson-prospective customer dyadic sample. To participate in the study, 224 salespeople and their potential customers were recruited from three different companies. Findings Results reveal the importance of conceptualizing the dimensionality of a salesperson’s EI ability, as different dimensions impact customer outcomes differently. Additionally, the importance of salesperson’s authentic emotional labor strategies is highlighted. Practical implications EI is a foundation for successful selling in a business-to-business environment, but it is not a silver bullet. Sales managers and recruiters should use assessment tools to evaluate sales recruit’s EI, but it is also critical to train salespeople to engage in deep acting, creating authentic emotions in the buyer-seller relationship. Originality/value Using a dyadic sample, this study suggests that the dimensions of EI and emotional labor strategies influence customer’s perception of salesperson’s trustworthiness and propensity to continue the relationship with the salesperson differently. Specifically, not all dimensions of salesperson’s EI is found to be positive, and only salesperson’s authentic (deep) emotional strategies are found to influence customer outcomes positively.

In this study, based on the Comparative Performance Assessment Study survey conducted by the Product Development Management Association, the authors develop and test a model which considers the antecedents and performance outcomes of social cohesion, a seemingly critical organizational factor in new product development (NPD). Using a sample of over 450 innovation and product development professionals from North America, Europe, and Asia, social cohesion is conceptualized and tested across three levels—within team cohesion, between team cohesion, and between firm cohesion. The results of a structural equation model indicate several differences between the antecedents of the varying forms of social cohesion. A post hoc exploration of the difference between goods‐ versus service‐dominant firms provides a clearer picture of cohesion's influence on innovation outcomes. Specifically, within team and between team cohesion are positively associated with new services performance, while for traditional goods‐based NPD, within team, between team, and between firm cohesion all appear to be positively related to performance. The findings suggest that high social cohesion is not always optimal and that managers should focus on specific types or levels of social cohesion as opposed to thinking about social cohesion as a one‐dimensional construct. The findings also suggest that goods‐ and service‐centric firms can use different tactics or strategies to drive social cohesion and, ultimately, new product performance, and that innovation managers may need to allocate resources differently depending on the nature of the market offering being developed. The paper also presents several implications for theory and practice, as well as future research directions related to the various levels of social cohesion and their influence on new product and new service performance.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract