2019
DOI: 10.1177/0022243718824561
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Managing Laggards: The Importance of a Deep Sales Bench

Abstract: Sales leaders often use threats of punishment to manage poor performers (i.e., laggards), but little research has examined the effect of these threats. The current research addresses this gap by investigating an intervention termed the “bench program” with a field-based quasi experiment and a randomized lab experiment. In the field, the company under study told salespeople in treatment districts that a trainee would replace them at the end of the year if they failed to hit their quota and placed last in their … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In other words, these different peaks in the data indicate the existence of different groups. This observation aligns well with our expectation of strongly varying individual predispositions regarding the app and reinforces our motivation to conduct quantile regressions to examine whether the app design choices and the benefit appeal have differential effects across the distribution (Boichuk et al, 2019;Kishore et al, 2013).…”
Section: Model Specificationsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…In other words, these different peaks in the data indicate the existence of different groups. This observation aligns well with our expectation of strongly varying individual predispositions regarding the app and reinforces our motivation to conduct quantile regressions to examine whether the app design choices and the benefit appeal have differential effects across the distribution (Boichuk et al, 2019;Kishore et al, 2013).…”
Section: Model Specificationsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…ubiquity of relationship disruptions(Boles et al 2012;Boichuk et al 2019;Darmon 2008), their potentially detrimental effects on customer revenue, and their potential for creating new business opportunities require companies to manage their risks and pursue their opportunities carefully. To that end, our study provides three main sets of actionable implications to help managers (1) prioritize their efforts among customers subject to a relationship disruption, (2) select which activities to undertake to retain or expand business with prioritized customers, and (3) capitalize on the revitalization of customer relationships.First, when a relationship disruption is impending (e.g., salesperson's resignation, retirement, or promotion), managers can use our findings to assess their exposure to financial risks and opportunities and prioritize customers accordingly.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, such interpersonal relationships can be easily disrupted (Boichuk et al 2019; Panagopoulos, Mullins, and Avramidis 2018; Shi et al 2017), whether by managerial fiat (e.g., sales organization restructurings, account strategies, territory alignments) or through individual decisions (e.g., career path, retirement, turnover). A relationship disruption 1 refers to a change of salesperson in the relationship with the customer, that is, from one salesperson to another employed by the selling firm.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We measure salesperson performance as the actual sales volume (in dollars) of salesperson i in month t divided by the quota (in dollars) set for salesperson i in month t. This ratio includes both sales made before quota is achieved and sales made after quota is achieved (i.e., bonus-eligible sales). Proportion of quota attained has been commonly employed as a measure of salesperson performance within the sales literature (Ahearne et al 2010; Boichuk et al 2019; Patil and Syam 2018). Quota attainment and other relative referent measures of salesperson performance are viewed as suitable in empirical settings where differences in contextual factors (e.g., territory differences, differences in economic conditions, differences in competitive intensity) present a threat to an examination of factors that vary by salesperson (Bolander et al 2021).…”
Section: Study 1: Natural Field Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%