the impact of sales force effort on their performance : a study of direct sales in banking industry

The Impact of Sales Force Effort on their Performance : A Study of Direct Sales in Banking Industry

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview

In spite of the extensive research literature on salesperson inspiration,

performance, and job satisfaction, one vital variable has been mostly ignored – effort.

Although it is instinctively logical that the tougher salespeople work, the healthier they

perform, few endeavors have been made to empirically paper the power of this affiliation.

Salespeople working for direct-selling companies traditionally are independent

contractors rather than employees. Hence, company managers recruit, train and motivate

salespeople but do not have coercive power over them. Thus, direct sales people enjoy a

high degree of self-determination over their work activities. The foundation of this study

is relying on the effort (work related, role ambiguity and job security & job satisfaction)

which are affecting the performance of the organization. Organization psychologists

have pointed out that are two orientations with which people approach their work. In one,

people find the work itself enjoyable. They like their job and think work is fun that is

they find the content of their work is fun, that is they find the content of their work

intrinsically reward. Another orientation is to think of work as something that must be

done, either to avoid unpleasant consequences (e.g. being fired) or to obtain pleasant

consequences (e.g. more pay). An obvious way to reduce the conflict is to reduce the

number of sales calls. Coping with role conflict by reducing effort is likely to affect sales

performance negatively. Effect of role ambiguity and role conflict on sales performance

has been weaker and less consistent. A long practice of theory and research has

contended that work itself provides sense and gratification irrespective of performance


2

results. As in today’s world, the cost of selling has significantly over the decade. A recent

survey reports that the average cost of an industrial sales call is $131, and the total selling

cost to close a sale is $751 at 5.5 calls per completed sales. These costs increased 81% in

the mid eighty’s. The new communication approaches that firms are using to reduce the

cost of selling such as telemarketing, direct mail, and demonstration centers.

1.2 Problem statement

Study on the effort affecting sales force on their performance in the field of direct

sales banking industry.

1.3 Hypothesis

H1: Work related effort of sales force has a significant impact on their

performance.

H2: Role Ambiguity related effort of sales force has a significant impact on their

performance.

H3: Job Satisfaction and Job Security related effort of sales force has a significant

impact on their performance.

1.4 Outline of the Study

The idea of this research is to find out the impact of Sales Force Effort

(Work related effort, Role Ambiguity related effort, and Job Satisfaction and Job

Security related effort) on their performance in the field of Direct Sales Banking

industry. The performance drastically changes due to the direct sales effort by

offering the deposit and other consumer products directly to the consumers which

have both negative and positive outcomes. The function of the study is to examine


3

that which of variables (Work related effort, Role Ambiguity related effort, and

Job Satisfaction and Job Security related effort) has a significant impact in

forecasting the performance of the organization and whether the significant

variables are positively or negatively associated with the performance of the

organization.

1.5 Definition:

1.5.1. Sales Force:

The primary function of professional sales force is to produce and educate

projection, fill needs and make happy wants of consumers properly, and therefore

turn prospective clients into actual ones. Questioning – to recognize a customer's

goal and necessities applicable to the product – and the formation of a precious

answer by communicating the essential information that inspires a buyer to get

their aim at an monetary cost comprise the functions of the salesperson or of the

sales engine (for example, the Internet, a vending machine, etc.). A good sales

clerk should never mis-sell or over-evaluate the customer's wants.

1.5.2. Effort:

The word effort means the force, or activity by which goal is achieved.

1.5.3. Work Related Effort:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vending_machine


4

It is define as the effort or energy that encourages sales people to work

hard to obtain extrinsic rewards (making more money, getting a promotion,

winning a contest) with the help of work.

1.5.4. Role Ambiguity Related Effort:

It is uncertainty of role or position. In other words role ambiguity is

something that is dubious which effect to take proper and timely decision with

confidence.

1.5.5. Job Security and Job Satisfaction Related Effort:

Job Security and Job Satisfaction are both inter related with each other.

Job Satisfaction for an employee of any organization is also depending on the job

security. Once the employee frame of mind is clear about his job stability, he

satisfies from his job.

1.5.6. Performance:

The achievement of a specified task measured against predetermined

known values of accuracy, wholeness, cost, and speed. In a contract, performance

is considered the success of an obligation, in a manner that releases the performer

from all liabilities under the contract.


5

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

The association between effort and work satisfaction is of specific interest.

Salesperson work satisfaction primarily as a purpose of effort exerted. Exertion of effort

in the work itself offers fulfillment of people’s fundamental needs to be experienced,

operative, and self-determining, and hence contributes to work satisfaction individually

of performance outcomes (Walker, Churchill, and Ford 1977).

Campbell and Pritchard (1976) theoretically, efforts has been confused with, or

considered equal to motivation. For example, motivation explained as the amount of

effort used in work related duty. Motivation and efforts are preserved as theoretically

distinct, with the efforts relating to the force, energy, or activity by which job is

completed, whereas motivation related to the psychological state of the character with

admiration to choices connecting the way, concentration, and perseverance of behavior

(Ilgen and Klein 1988; Naylor, Pritchard, and Ilgen 1980). Defined two important

standpoints on the mental value of work: (1) work as a contributory value and (2) effort

as a fatal value. It also explained, “Work is a normal law that directs life. It produces a

feeling of self-esteem, self-respect, and individuality” (Cherrington 1980). A long custom

of philosophy and study has argued that work itself delivers meaning and satisfaction


6

regardless of performance outcomes. White (1959, p.318) claims that people own an

innate need for “reflectance.” (Deci and Ryan 1985) perspectives propose that efforts

affect work satisfaction in ways that do not depend on closely defined performance

outcome. In positioning, that performance completely arbitrates the association between

effort and employment satisfaction, certain expectancy theory model. The study examines

whether commonly recognized theoretical associations between energy, enactment and

job satisfaction embrace when sales enactment are calculated only in relationships of

outcomes that are helpful to the organization(Churchill, Ford and Walker 1993).

Sales force and managerial behavior researchers have constantly documented the

importance of effort in theoretical simulations of performance (Naylor, Pritchard, and

Ilgen 1980; Walker, Churchill, and Ford 1977). These simulations characteristically have

considered effort to mediate the connection between motivation and performance. Other

theoretical frameworks also forecast a straight effect of effort on work satisfaction not

mediated by performance. For example, self-perception theory (Bem 1972) posits that

people surmise their attitudes from their own obvious behavior. The contributory sales

person is likely to keep an attention on the details of task performance, identify the

connection between effort and sales performance, and involve and persist in the activities

contributory to successful performance (Spence and Helmreich 1983).

The significance attach to above the performance of others encourages them to exert high

effort levels in the hope that it will lead to winning performance. Such active apparently

constitute a “theory in use” (Zaltman, LeMaster, and Heffring 1982) of sales managers,

who frequently use sales competitions to stimulate effort and increase sales. Although


7

researchers have examined the effects of competitions on sales performance (e.g., Wildt,

Parker, and Harris 1987; Wortruba and Schoel 1983), very few have measured the effects

of keenness as a dispositional characteristic of salespeople. One exception was Plotkin

(1987), who described an optimistic affiliation between competiveness and sales

performance. Competitiveness has been initiate to be connected with the quantity of

periodicals of educational psychologists (Helmreich et al. 1980), business performance

by industrialists (Carsrud and Olm 1986), and performance of marketable lending officer

(Murphy 1986).

Locke (1968) proposes that effect of competition on performance was likely to occur

though stimulation of advanced stages of effort. Conferring to Locke (1968, P. 179),

competition “can assist as a motivation to rise one’s effort on a duty.” Greatly

competitive sales people are likely to exercise superior effort than less competitive sales

people are. Effort projected to arbitrate the relationships between instrumentality,

competitiveness, and performance. Effects of part vagueness and part battle on sales

performance have been feebler and less consistent (Brown and Peterson 1993).

Likewise, improbability regarding role performance prospects is likely to result in less

purposeful exertion of effort (Behrman and Perreault 1984), causing in lower sales

performance. Thus, it is sensible to expect character ambiguity to affect salesperson effort

harmfully and effort to intermediate the effect of character ambiguity on sales

performance. Reliable with valuable research (e.g., Churchill, Ford and Walker 1976), a

straight adverse effect of role ambiguity on job satisfaction is forecast. Besides

examining achievement and disappointments, it is significant to allocate the “right” types


8

of reasons for these results. For example, taking recognition of successes and blaming

others for disappointments is not mainly helpful for learning. In contrast, ascribing

outcomes to one’s individual selling tactic and effort appear to be specific facilitative. In

specific, ascribing failure to poor strategy, leads salespeople to discover a better, more

suitable way to sell (H. Sujan 1986).

Ouchi (1981) a number of researchers have originated larger working environment in

companies that encourage from within and foster long-term employment, rather than

attractive in a repeated procedure of hiring and firing. David L. Kurtz, Eugene M. Johnson,

Eberhard E. Scheuing (1994, p.142), heading one controlling organization, yet his effect

has implications for the vending activities of many commercial giants. If there is only one

endless face about the selling situation, it is that the environment is regularly fluctuating.

Effective sales manager must make every effort to permit their sales forces to contract

with these fluctuations. Gilbert A. Churchill, Jr., Neil M. Ford, Orville C. Walker, Jr., (1997,

p.108,) Adam Smith pointed out the competence with which nearly any role is performed

can be improved by distributing it into its section activities and assigning each activity to

an expert. Division and specialization of labor rise productivity because each specialist

can distillates efforts and become more capable at the assigned duty.

Deci and Rayan (1985) preserve that person’s maximum participation in and satisfactions

with their actions occur only when those actions are self-determined. Therefore, the

hypothesis in a context in which self-determination exploited. Such situation is likely to

provide a hard boundary condition test of effort, effects on performance and ultimately

get satisfaction under fundamental sequence. Three self-report items measuring overall


9

effort in the sales duty, number of hours operated, and number of call made measured

salesperson effort.

The direct effect of efforts on employment satisfaction appeared clearly; it is possible that

the effect was particular to the direct-selling framework. Meta-analytic methods used to

synthesize previous research involving effort, work, performance and job satisfaction

(Brown, et al). The effort has a solid direct effect on job satisfaction that is not dependent

on sales performance. The findings also verify those of earlier studies (e.g., Behrman and

Perreault 1984; Dubinsky and Hartly 1986) that sales performance is, at best, uncertainly

related to job satisfaction. Although effort also had a parallel positive effect on

performance, its positive effect on job satisfaction happened independently of

performance.

The solid direct effect of effort on job satisfaction suggests that the viewpoint of work as

a terminal value merits greater care in theoretical models of work behavior and job

attitudes. This effect is consistent with theories of basic motivation (Csikszentmihalyi

1990; Deci 1975; Deci and Ryan 1985; white 1959), which emphasize people’s inherent

needs to be capable, effective, and self-regulating and maintain that high levels of

participation in instrumental activities such as work constitute a primary means of

sustaining these requirements. Understanding the procedure through which role

ambiguity harmfully affects sales performance by representing that effort arbitrates the

connection, which proposes that the effect of role ambiguity on sales performance

happens primarily through a decrease in level of effort employed. Contrary to role

ambiguity, role conflicts had a negative direct effect on employment satisfaction but no


10

substantial effect on either effort or performance (Behrman and Perreault 1984). In term

of falsificationist opinion theory improvement (cf. Popper 1963), the experimental study

has subjected the hypothesis that closely defined sales performance totally mediates the

effect of efforts on job satisfaction to a hard test and provided disconfirming indication.

Management focus on effort is also likely to be important in encouraging expert

salespeople. Honor clubs (e.g., hundred percent clubs) are likely to be the outstanding

way of motivating high performance to sustain high efforts level. (Sherif et al. 1961)

recommends that these dispositional traits are positively related to effort and

performance, respectively, and that managers might monitor applicants usefully for sales

positions on these characters. Social psychologist signifying that effortful problematic

initiation tends to improve people’s attitude toward group belonging (e.g., Aronson and

Mills 1959; Gerard and Mathewson 1966). Weitz, H. Sujan and M. Sujan, 1986), have

strong believe that many motivational programs underlying presently in practice which

are designed for salespeople so that they work hard, make more sales calls, spend more

time on selling and put more effort to tough customers. To increase sales productivity /

performance sales people should not only work effort on tough customers but also work

smarter during the interaction with customers so that chances to sell the product are more.

H. Sujan and Weitz (1987) the study indicated that above average performers showed

greater variability in the selling strategies they used across their customers. Further an

intrinsic interest in the task selling, finding the experience of selling enjoyable wan an

important predictor of adaptive selling. It is possible to help sales people develop links

between strategies and sales situations through training programs that focus on the


11

unitization of information rather than simply on supplying information. Merrill and Reid

(1981) training program describe earlier unitizes information by given sales people rules

for classifying customers and then recommending sales strategies appropriate for each

classification similarly through trial and error learning, rather than training J.R Fredrick

was able to associate effective strategies with customer categories he frequent encounter.

The negative effect of role conflict on job satisfaction on the other hand it is likely to be

strong and direct because conflict is likely to generate less positive evaluation of the job

(e.g., Churchill, Ford and Walker 1976). The study was conducted in the context of a

direct-selling organization. This context was used to provide a rigorous test of boundary

conditions under which performance totally mediates the relationship between effort and

satisfaction as posited in prevailing conceptual models. If the hypothesized relationships

are not supported empirically under boundary conditions, they are not likely to hold in

other situations.

A direct – selling company sells to the end users with the use of channel intermediaries. It

has been estimated recently that approximately 5.5 million Americans and a rapidly

growing number of people worldwide work for direct selling organizations and that

annual industry sales exceed $ fourteen billion dollar in the United States and forty

billion dollars globally. (Direct Selling Education Foundation 1993). The role ambiguity

and role conflict measures were taken from Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman (1970) and

consisted of six Likert such items each. The measures contained fewer items than the

original scales owing to eliminate of items that did not relate well to the direct-selling

context.


12


13

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODS

3.1 Method of Data Collection

The method, which has been used, for data collection was the Survey. As

surveying is one of the most crucial and important part of any research so it was also one

of the intricate and time consuming element of the research as it involves meeting

numerous number of people whom are part of different sorts of life. For this survey

especially questionnaire was been designed and it has been consciously attempted during

this survey that prior to filling the questionnaire from people the importance and reason

of the questionnaire should had been obvious on them in a way to evade any pointless

biasness on the part of the contributors. The sample was selected from all 10 different

local, private and foreign banks which have direct sales teams. It also cover the total

experience and experience in sales.

3.2 Sampling Technique

For this study, the Convenience Sampling Method has been used.

3.3 Sample Size

For this study the sample size which has been comprised of 100

reactants/respondents for the research. The reactants/respondents which were chosen

from 10 different local, private and foreign banks which have direct sales teams to obtain

the unbiased data as the research was been dependable upon it.


14

3.4 Instrument of Data Collection

The instrument of data collection, which has been designed, for this research is

Questionnaire. Questionnaire has included 15 questions along with it is majorly divided

into four different sections and each one section has the similar layout in the

questionnaire.

The questions incorporated in the first section are based on Dependent Variable

(Performance), in the second, third and fourth sections are based on Independent Variable

(Work related effort, Role Ambiguity related effort, and Job Satisfaction & Job Security

related effort).

3.5 Research Model developed

The research model which was prepared, illustrates that Independent Variable

(Work related effort, Role Ambiguity related effort, and Job Satisfaction & Job Security

related effort) can predict Dependent Variable (Performance).

→

Work Related Effort

Role Ambiguity Related Effort

Job Satisfaction and Job Security Related

Effort

Performance


15

3.6 Statistical Technique

For this research the Multiple Regression Analysis was been applied. In order to

test the hypothesis for the grounds that there are four independent variables (Work related

effort, Role Ambiguity related effort, and Job Satisfaction & Job Security related effort)

and one dependent variable (Performance).

Optimal scaling technique has been employed for this research, as the data was non-

parametric ordinal data or categorical data. Now have taken one dependent variable

(Performance) and have taken independent variable (Work related effort, Role Ambiguity

related effort, and Job Satisfaction & Job Security related effort). For the questionnaire

filling it has been attempted to offer every necessary awareness to the

reactants/respondents so they without difficulty provide their correct outlooks and ideas

as per inquired in the questionnaire which would be valuable for the statistical technique

to be executed.


16

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS

4.1 Findings and Interpretation of the results

Table 4.1

Model Summaryb

Model R R SquareAdjusted R

SquareStd. Error of the

Estimate

1 .131a .017 -.014 .69918

a. Predictors: (Constant), Job Security and Job Satisfaction Related Effort, Role Ambiguity Related Effort, Work Related Effort

b. Dependent Variable: Performance

The model summary table informs the potency of the relationship among the model as

well as the dependent variable. The multiple correlation coefficients R, is the linear

correlation among the observed as well as model-predicted values of the dependent

variable. Its huge value signifies a strong relationship. The value of the multiple

correlation coefficients is the coefficient of determination squared, which is R Square. It

shows that only about 1.7 % the variation in time is explicates by the model. At this point

the value of Adjusted R Square has been taken for the reason that there are four

independent variables (job Security and job satisfaction related effort, role ambiguity

effort, and work related effort) and the value of Adjusted R Square is -.014.


17

Table 4.2 ANOVAb

ModelSum of Squares df

Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression .821 3 .274 .560 .643a

Residual 46.930 96 .489

Total 47.751 99



The test, which tests the acceptability of the model from a statistical viewpoint, is the

ANOVA table. The Regression row exhibits information regarding the variation

accounted for the model. The Residual row exhibits information regarding the variation,

which is not accounted for the model. The regression and residual sums of squares are

more or less equal, which point out that about half of the variation in (job Security and

job satisfaction related effort, role ambiguity effort, work related effort) time is explained

by the model. The value of significance of the F statistic is greater than 0.05, which

indicates that the deviation explained by the model is for the reason that of the chance. As

the ANOVA table is a helpful test of the model's capability to clarify any deviation in the

dependent variable, it straightly deals with the power of that relationship. Here the value

of F is .560 at P = 0.643 which is P>0.05, hence it is not significant.


18

Table 4.3

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Collinearity Statistics

B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF

1

(Constant) 3.968 .476 8.330 .000

Work Related Effort

.017 .097 .021 .178 .859 .709 1.410


.027 .092 .031 .297 .767 .963 1.038

Job Security and Job Satisfaction Related Effort

-.157 .132 -.143 -1.185 .239 .705 1.418

a. Dependent Variable: Performance

In this table illustrates that there are the entire variables are significant variables which

are the job Security and job satisfaction related effort, role ambiguity effort, work related

effort that have not the significant value greater than 0.05. On the other hand the negative

value of beta shows the negative relationship between job security and job satisfaction

related effort and performance even as rest of the variables demonstrating the positive

association. As the cutoff point of t is 1.5, therefore here all the variables t value is less

than 1.5 so it has been rejected. Tolerance Test and VIF have shown that there is no

multicollinearity between the independent variable because the values of Tolerance Test

greater than the defined range of Tolerance Test which is 0.1-0.2 and the values of VIF is

less than the defined range of VIF which is 5-10.


19

4.2 Hypotheses Assessment Summary

Hypothesis Beta Value of Significance

Accepted/Rejected

Work Related Effort .017 .859 Rejected

Role Ambiguity Related Effort .027 .767Rejected


-.157 .239Rejected


20

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION, DISCUSSIONS,

IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATION, AND FUTURE

RESEARCH

5.1 Conclusions

In this research, the impact of effort on the performance in the field of direct sales

in banking industry is quite not visible. There are three hypotheses in this research. All

three of them test the impact of effort on the performance in the field of direct sales in

banking industry. According to the results of this research all three of independent

variables (Work related effort, Role Ambiguity related effort, and Job Satisfaction & Job

Security related effort) have no significant impact on dependent variable (Performance).

Independent variables (Work related effort, Role Ambiguity related effort, and Job

Satisfaction & Job Security related effort) have shown the insignificant value i.e. greater

than 0.05 which are reflecting the rejection of the hypotheses that would be comprehend

the insignificant impact of independent variables on dependent variable in this research

5.2 Discussions

Effort is used for identifying the variable which influences to work harder and

smarter, and identifying the reasons of sales according to the effort of the sales force as

per the analysis on the three variables (Work related effort, Role Ambiguity related

effort, and Job Satisfaction & Job Security related effort). In this research the data was

been collected through a questionnaire. 100 males and females from different sales

department of the banks, they were been asked to fill the questionnaire so that the


21

diversity of the data would become part of the research. The reason of the study is to

discover out the outcome of independent variables (Work related effort, Role Ambiguity

related effort, and Job Satisfaction & Job Security related effort) on dependent variable

(Performance) in the field of the direct sales in banking industry. For this research

regression analysis was used to test the significances of the independent variables (Work

related effort, Role Ambiguity related effort, and Job Satisfaction & Job Security related

effort) in forecasting the dependent variable (Performance). The result of the test

interpreted that all three of the independent variables (Work related effort, Role

Ambiguity related effort, and Job Satisfaction & Job Security related effort) are

insignificantly forecasting the dependent variable (Performance) These results have

shown that the Price Work related effort, Role Ambiguity related effort, and Job

Satisfaction & Job Security related effort in significantly influenced their Performance.

5.3 Implications and Recommendations

In this research it has been proved that all the independent variables (Work related

effort, Role Ambiguity related effort, and Job Satisfaction & Job Security related effort)

used in this particular research have no significant impact on the dependent variable

(Performance) but it is recommended to take compensation as independent variable

against performance to check the impact.

5.4 Limitation and Future Research

During the research compensation variable might have significant impact on the

dependent variable (Performance) as per our Pakistani market because sales force people


22

are mostly undergraduate and have no plan to study further so they have focused on

compensation side thus it is recommended to take compensation factor as independent

variable against performance in future.


23

REFERENCES

Aronson, Elliot and Judson Mills (1959), “The Effect of severity of Initiation on Liking

for a Group,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59 (September) 177-81.

Behrman, Douglas N. and William D. Perreault, Jr. (1984), “A Role Stress Model of the

Performance and Satisfaction of Industrial Salespersons,” Journal of Marketing, 48 (Fall),

9-21.

Bem, Darryl J. (1972), “Self-Perception Theory,” in Advances in Experimental Social

Psychology, Vol. 6, Leonard Berkowitz, ed. New York: Academic Press.

Brown, Steven P. and Robert A. Peterson (1993), “Antecedents and Consequences of

Salesperson Job Satisfaction: Meta-Analysis and Assessment of Causal Effects,” Journal

of Marketing Research, 30 (February), 63-77.

Brown, Steven P. and Robert A. Peterson (1994), “The Effect of Effort on Sales

Performance and Job Satisfaction,” Journal of Marketing Research, 58, 2; ABI/INFORM

Global (February), 70.

Campbell, John P. Robert D. Pritchard (1976), “Motivation Theory in Industrial and

Organizational Psychology,” in Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology,

Marvin Dunnette, ed. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 63-130.

Carsrud, Alan L. and Kenneth W. Olm (1986), “The Success of Male and Female

Entrepreneurs: A Comparative Analysis of the Effects of Multi-Dimensional


24

Achievement Motivation,” in Managing Take-Off in the Fast Growth Companies,

Raymond W. Smilor and Robert L. Kuhn, eds. New York: Praeger.

Cherrington, David J. (1980), The Work Ethic: Working Values and Values that Work.

New York: Amacom.

Churchill, Gilbert A., Jr., Neil M. Ford, Steven W. Hartley, and Orville C. Walker

(1985), “The Determinants of Salesperson Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of

Marketing Research, 22 (May), 103-18.

Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (1990), Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New

York: Harper and Row.

David L. Kurtz, Eugene M. Johnson, Eberhard E. Scheuing (1994), Sales Management

Concepts, Practices and Cases, P.142.

Deci, Edward L. (1975), Intrinsic Motivation. New York: Plenum. Deci, and Richard M.

Rayan (1985), Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New

York: Plenum.

Gilbert A. Churchill, Jr., Neil M. Ford, Orville C. Walker, Jr., (1997),”Sales Force

Management,” p.108.

Helmreich, Robert L. and Janet T. Spence (1978), “The Work and Family Orientation

Questionnaire: An Objective Instrument to Assess Components of Achievement

Motivation and Attitudes Towards Family and Career,” JSAS Catalog of Selected

Documents in Psychology, 8, 35.


25

Ilgen, Daniel R. Howard J. Klein (1988), “Individual Motivation and Performance:

Cognitive Influences on Effort and Choices,” in Productivity in Organizations, John P.

Campbell and Rischard J. Campbell, eds. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 143-76.

Locke, Edwin A. (1968), “Toward a Theory of Task Motivation and Incentives,”

Organization Behavior and Human Performance, 3 (May), 157-89.

Murphy, Richard H. (1986), “Personality Correlates of Commercial Lending Job

Performance,” doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.

Naylor, James C., Robert D. Pritchard, and Daniel R. Ilgen (1980), A Theory of Behavior

in Organizations. New York: Academic Press.

Ouchi, William (1981), Theory Z, Addison-Wesley, Reading, M.A.

Plotkin, Harris M. (1987), “What Makes a Successful Salesperson?” Training and

Development Journal, 41 (September), 54-56.

Popper, Karl R. (1963), conjectures and Refutations. New York: Harper Torch books.

Sherif, Muzafer, O.J. Harvey, B. Jack White, William R. Hood, and Carolyn W. Sherif

(1961), Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation: The Robber’s Cove Experiment, Norman,

OK: University of Oklahoma, Institute of Intergroup Relations.

Spence, Janet T. and Robert L. Helmreich (1978), Masculinity and Femininity: This

Psychological Dimensions, Correlates, and Antecedents. Austin, TX: University of Texas

Press.


26

Sujan, Harish (1986), “Smarter Versus Harder: An Exploratory Attributional Analysis of

Salespeople’s Motivation,” Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (February), 41-49.

Walker, Orville C., Gilbert A. Churchill, Jr., and Neil M. Ford (1977), “Motivation and

Performance in Industrial Selling: Present Knowledge and Needed Research,” Journal of

Marketing Research, 14 (May), 15-68.

White, Robert W. (1959), “Motivation Reconsidered: The Concept of Competence,”

Psychological Review, 66 (July), 297-333.

Wildt, Albert R., James D. Parker, and Clyde E. Harris, Jr. (1987), “Assessing the Impact

of Sales force Contests: An Application,” Journal of Business Research, 15 (March), 145-

55.

Zaltman, Gerald, Karen LeMasters, and Michael Heffring (1982), Theory Construction in

Marketing. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.


27

APENDIX

Filled Questionnaire

Unfilled Questionnaire

Total Output

SPSS Variable View

SPSS Data View


28

Filled Questionnaire


29


30


31

Unfilled Questionnaire

Impact of sales force effort on their performance

Name _______________________ Gender_______________________

Age_________________________ Education_____________________

Total experience ______________ Current Organization____________

Do you have an experience in sales?

Yes No

Since how long have you been associated with sales organization?

Less than a year. Between one year to three years. More than three years to five years. More than five years

Based on your experience to evaluate your effort on your performance.

Tick mark (√) the appropriate option given against each question.

Performance:

Sr.

Questions Strongly Disagree

Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

1 Does work related effort become an important attribute to perform well?

2 Does role ambiguity related effort become an important attribute to perform well?

3 Does job satisfaction and job security related effort become an important attribute to perform


32

well?

Work-related effort:

Sr.



1 Does working environment effect on your effort to perform well?

2 Do you feel good co-workers impact positively on your effort to perform well?

3 Does motivation during working hours give improve effort to perform well?

4 Do you feel that on job training has significant impact on your effort?

Role Ambiguity related effort:

Sr. Questions Strongly Disagree


1 Do you feel that proper career path play an important role on effort to perform well?

2 Does timely elevation effect on effort?

3 Do you feel that role diversification has significant impact on effort to perform well?

4 Do you feel that working on same role negatively effect on


33

effort to perform well?

Job Satisfaction and Job Security related effort:

Sr.



1 Do you feel job security has significant impact on effort to perform?

2 Does job security have positive effect on satisfaction to perform well?

3 Do you feel job satisfaction enable you to put effort in the positive direction?

4 Does compensation has positive effect on job satisfaction?


34

TOTAL OUTPUT

Regression

Regression

Variables Entered/Removed

ModelVariables Entered

Variables Removed Method

1

Job Security and Job Satisfaction Related Effort, Role Ambiguity Related Effort, Work Related Efforta

. Enter

a. All requested variables entered.

Model Summaryb

Model R R SquareAdjusted R

SquareStd. Error of the Estimate

1 .131a .017 -.014 .69918




35

ANOVAb

ModelSum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression .821 3 .274 .560 .643a

Residual 46.930 96 .489

Total 47.751 99



Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t Sig.

Collinearity Statistics

B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF

1

(Constant) 3.968 .476 8.330.00

0

Work Related Effort

.017 .097 .021 .178.85

9.709 1.410


.027 .092 .031 .297.76

7.963 1.038


-.157 .132 -.143-

1.185.23

9.705 1.418

a. Dependent Variable: Performance


36

SPSS Variable View


37

SPSS Data View


38

Sr. Total Experience Experience in Sales Role Ambiguity Related EffortJob Security and Job Satisfaction Related Effort

Q.No1 Q.No2 Q.No3 Q.No1 Q.No2 Q.No3 Q.No4 Q.No1 Q.No2 Q.No3 Q.No4 Q.No1 Q.No2 Q.No3 Q.No41 4 1 5 1 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 3 4 3 4 5 5 3.33 4.00 4.00 4.252 4 1 4 3 5 5 4 1 1 3 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 4.00 2.75 2.25 4.003 3 1 5 4 1 4 3 5 5 4 5 4 3 2 5 3 5 3.33 4.25 4.00 3.754 4 1 4 3 5 3 1 2 4 2 4 1 5 1 4 4 4 4.00 2.50 3.00 3.255 4 2 3 1 2 4 2 4 3 4 5 3 4 4 2 3 1 2.00 3.25 4.00 2.506 3 1 4 2 4 5 4 5 3 1 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 3.33 4.25 3.50 4.757 3 1 5 4 5 5 3 4 4 5 5 2 4 4 4 3 5 4.67 4.00 4.00 4.008 3 1 5 3 4 1 5 2 2 3 2 3 1 3 4 2 3 4.00 2.50 2.25 3.009 3 1 1 5 2 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 5 3 4 3 2.67 3.25 4.25 3.7510 4 2 5 4 3 5 3 5 5 1 5 3 3 4 4 5 2 4.00 4.50 3.00 3.7511 3 1 3 1 4 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 5 3 5 4 4 2.67 4.00 4.50 4.0012 3 1 4 5 4 5 2 5 3 3 3 1 4 4 3 2 5 4.33 3.75 2.75 3.5013 2 1 2 4 1 2 1 3 1 5 5 3 2 2 5 4 4 2.33 1.75 3.75 3.7514 4 2 4 5 3 3 5 5 3 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 2 4.00 4.00 4.50 3.5015 4 1 1 4 4 1 3 1 2 4 5 3 4 5 3 3 1 3.00 1.75 4.00 3.0016 2 1 5 5 2 4 3 5 4 1 4 3 4 3 3 5 2 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.2517 3 1 3 2 3 5 4 4 1 3 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 2.67 3.50 2.25 4.0018 2 1 4 4 4 4 3 5 5 4 5 2 3 5 5 3 5 4.00 4.25 3.50 4.5019 3 1 1 5 3 3 1 2 4 2 1 1 5 1 1 4 4 3.00 2.50 2.25 2.5020 2 1 3 4 5 4 2 4 3 4 5 3 4 4 2 3 1 4.00 3.25 4.00 2.5021 3 2 4 4 4 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 5 3 5 4 4 4.00 4.00 4.50 4.0022 4 1 2 5 3 5 2 5 3 3 3 1 4 4 3 2 5 3.33 3.75 2.75 3.5023 4 1 1 4 4 2 1 3 1 5 5 3 2 2 5 4 4 3.00 1.75 3.75 3.7524 4 1 4 2 3 3 5 5 3 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 2 3.00 4.00 4.50 3.5025 4 1 5 5 5 1 3 1 2 4 5 3 4 5 3 3 1 5.00 1.75 4.00 3.0026 4 1 4 4 3 4 3 5 4 1 4 3 4 3 3 5 2 3.67 4.00 3.00 3.2527 4 1 3 4 2 5 4 4 1 3 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 3.00 3.50 2.25 4.0028 3 1 5 3 4 4 3 5 5 4 5 2 3 5 5 3 5 4.00 4.25 3.50 4.5029 4 1 4 4 5 3 1 2 4 2 1 1 5 1 1 4 4 4.33 2.50 2.25 2.5030 4 2 3 5 4 4 2 4 3 4 5 3 4 4 2 3 1 4.00 3.25 4.00 2.5031 3 1 4 3 2 5 4 5 3 1 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 3.00 4.25 3.50 4.7532 3 1 2 5 4 5 3 4 4 5 5 2 4 4 4 3 5 3.67 4.00 4.00 4.0033 3 1 4 4 4 1 5 2 2 3 2 3 1 3 4 2 3 4.00 2.50 2.25 3.0034 3 1 5 3 3 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 5 3 4 3 3.67 3.25 4.25 3.7535 4 2 3 3 5 5 3 5 5 1 5 3 3 4 4 5 2 3.67 4.50 3.00 3.7536 3 1 5 4 3 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 5 3 5 4 4 4.00 4.00 4.50 4.0037 3 1 3 1 4 5 2 5 3 3 3 1 4 4 3 2 5 2.67 3.75 2.75 3.5038 2 1 4 5 4 2 1 3 1 5 5 3 2 2 5 4 4 4.33 1.75 3.75 3.7539 4 2 2 4 1 3 5 5 3 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 2 2.33 4.00 4.50 3.5040 4 1 4 5 3 1 3 1 2 4 5 3 4 5 3 3 1 4.00 1.75 4.00 3.0041 2 1 1 4 4 5 4 5 3 1 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 3.00 4.25 3.50 4.7542 3 1 5 5 2 5 3 4 4 5 5 2 4 4 4 3 5 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.0043 2 1 3 2 3 1 5 2 2 3 2 3 1 3 4 2 3 2.67 2.50 2.25 3.0044 3 1 4 4 4 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 5 3 4 3 4.00 3.25 4.25 3.7545 2 1 1 5 3 5 3 5 5 1 5 3 3 4 4 5 2 3.00 4.50 3.00 3.75

Role Ambiguity

related effort

Job Security and job

Satisfaction related effort

Work Related EffortPerformanceWork

Related Effort

Performance


39

46 3 2 4 5 4 4 3 5 4 1 4 3 4 3 3 5 2 4.33 4.00 3.00 3.2547 4 1 3 3 1 5 4 4 1 3 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 2.33 3.50 2.25 4.0048 4 1 5 5 3 4 3 5 5 4 5 2 3 5 5 3 5 4.33 4.25 3.50 4.5049 4 1 5 4 4 3 1 2 4 2 1 1 5 1 1 4 4 4.33 2.50 2.25 2.5050 4 1 5 5 2 4 2 4 3 4 5 3 4 4 2 3 1 4.00 3.25 4.00 2.5051 3 1 5 1 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 3 4 3 4 5 5 3.33 4.00 4.00 4.2552 2 1 4 3 5 5 4 1 1 3 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 4.00 2.75 2.25 4.0053 4 2 5 4 1 4 3 5 5 4 5 4 3 2 5 3 5 3.33 4.25 4.00 3.7554 4 1 4 3 5 3 1 2 4 2 4 1 5 1 4 4 4 4.00 2.50 3.00 3.2555 2 1 3 1 2 4 2 4 3 4 5 3 4 4 2 3 1 2.00 3.25 4.00 2.5056 3 1 4 2 4 5 4 5 3 1 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 3.33 4.25 3.50 4.7557 2 1 5 4 5 5 3 4 4 5 5 2 4 4 4 3 5 4.67 4.00 4.00 4.0058 3 1 5 3 4 1 5 2 2 3 2 3 1 3 4 2 3 4.00 2.50 2.25 3.0059 4 1 1 5 2 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 5 3 4 3 2.67 3.25 4.25 3.7560 4 1 5 4 3 5 3 5 5 1 5 3 3 4 4 5 2 4.00 4.50 3.00 3.7561 2 1 3 1 4 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 5 3 5 4 4 2.67 4.00 4.50 4.0062 3 2 4 5 4 5 2 5 3 3 3 1 4 4 3 2 5 4.33 3.75 2.75 3.5063 4 1 2 4 1 2 1 3 1 5 5 3 2 2 5 4 4 2.33 1.75 3.75 3.7564 4 1 4 5 3 3 5 5 3 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 2 4.00 4.00 4.50 3.5065 4 1 1 4 4 1 3 1 2 4 5 3 4 5 3 3 1 3.00 1.75 4.00 3.0066 4 1 5 5 2 4 3 5 4 1 4 3 4 3 3 5 2 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.2567 3 1 3 2 3 5 4 4 1 3 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 2.67 3.50 2.25 4.0068 3 1 4 4 4 4 3 5 5 4 5 2 3 5 5 3 5 4.00 4.25 3.50 4.5069 4 2 1 5 3 3 1 2 4 2 1 1 5 1 1 4 4 3.00 2.50 2.25 2.5070 3 1 3 4 5 4 2 4 3 4 5 3 4 4 2 3 1 4.00 3.25 4.00 2.5071 3 1 4 4 4 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 5 3 5 4 4 4.00 4.00 4.50 4.0072 2 1 2 5 3 5 2 5 3 3 3 1 4 4 3 2 5 3.33 3.75 2.75 3.5073 4 2 1 4 4 2 1 3 1 5 5 3 2 2 5 4 4 3.00 1.75 3.75 3.7574 4 1 4 2 3 3 5 5 3 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 2 3.00 4.00 4.50 3.5075 2 1 5 5 5 1 3 1 2 4 5 3 4 5 3 3 1 5.00 1.75 4.00 3.0076 3 1 4 4 3 4 3 5 4 1 4 3 4 3 3 5 2 3.67 4.00 3.00 3.2577 2 1 3 4 2 5 4 4 1 3 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 3.00 3.50 2.25 4.0078 3 1 5 3 4 4 3 5 5 4 5 2 3 5 5 3 5 4.00 4.25 3.50 4.5079 2 1 4 4 5 3 1 2 4 2 1 1 5 1 1 4 4 4.33 2.50 2.25 2.5080 4 1 3 5 4 4 2 4 3 4 5 3 4 4 2 3 1 4.00 3.25 4.00 2.5081 4 1 4 3 2 5 4 5 3 1 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 3.00 4.25 3.50 4.7582 3 1 2 5 4 5 3 4 4 5 5 2 4 4 4 3 5 3.67 4.00 4.00 4.0083 4 1 4 4 4 1 5 2 2 3 2 3 1 3 4 2 3 4.00 2.50 2.25 3.0084 4 2 5 3 3 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 5 3 4 3 3.67 3.25 4.25 3.7585 3 1 3 3 5 5 3 5 5 1 5 3 3 4 4 5 2 3.67 4.50 3.00 3.7586 3 1 5 4 3 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 5 3 5 4 4 4.00 4.00 4.50 4.0087 2 1 3 1 4 5 2 5 3 3 3 1 4 4 3 2 5 2.67 3.75 2.75 3.5088 4 1 4 5 4 2 1 3 1 5 5 3 2 2 5 4 4 4.33 1.75 3.75 3.7589 4 1 2 4 1 3 5 5 3 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 2 2.33 4.00 4.50 3.5090 4 1 4 5 3 1 3 1 2 4 5 3 4 5 3 3 1 4.00 1.75 4.00 3.0091 4 2 1 4 4 5 4 5 3 1 4 4 5 5 5 5 4 3.00 4.25 3.50 4.7592 3 1 5 5 2 5 3 4 4 5 5 2 4 4 4 3 5 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.0093 3 1 3 2 3 1 5 2 2 3 2 3 1 3 4 2 3 2.67 2.50 2.25 3.0094 2 1 4 4 4 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 5 3 4 3 4.00 3.25 4.25 3.7595 3 2 1 5 3 5 3 5 5 1 5 3 3 4 4 5 2 3.00 4.50 3.00 3.7596 4 1 4 5 4 4 3 5 4 1 4 3 4 3 3 5 2 4.33 4.00 3.00 3.2597 4 1 3 3 1 5 4 4 1 3 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 2.33 3.50 2.25 4.0098 3 1 5 5 3 4 3 5 5 4 5 2 3 5 5 3 5 4.33 4.25 3.50 4.5099 3 1 5 4 4 3 1 2 4 2 1 1 5 1 1 4 4 4.33 2.50 2.25 2.50

100 4 2 5 5 2 4 2 4 3 4 5 3 4 4 2 3 1 4 3.25 4 2.5