Determinants Of Ethical Behavior.pdf

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235304898

Determinants and consequences of ethical behaviour: An empirical study of salespeople Article  in  European Journal of Marketing · May 2005 DOI: 10.1108/03090560510590674

CITATIONS

READS

93

2,999

2 authors: Sergio Román

Jose-Luis Munuera-Alemán

University of Murcia

University of Murcia

56 PUBLICATIONS   1,160 CITATIONS   

128 PUBLICATIONS   2,094 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Dynamic Pricing and Ecommerce View project

new product development by collaboration with parthers View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sergio Román on 02 July 2014. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SEE PROFILE

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0309-0566.htm

Determinants and consequences of ethical behaviour: an empirical study of salespeople Sergio Roma´n and Jose´ Luis Munuera Marketing Department, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain

An empirical study of salespeople 473 Received July 2003 Revised April 2004 Accepted August 2004

Abstract Purpose – The main purpose of this research is to gain a clearer understanding of several key determinants and consequences of the ethical behaviour of salespeople. Design/methodology/approach – Questionnaires were administered during regularly scheduled meetings to a total of 280 financial services salespeople. The salespeople questioned were mainly specializing in selling high-involvement financial products (e.g. mortgages, life insurance) to final consumers. Findings – Results suggest that method of compensation and control system (CS) are important determinants of ethical behaviour. Age (AGE) also proves to be a significant antecedent of ethical behaviour. However, education (EDU) is not significantly related to ethical behaviour. Additionally, a salesperson’s ethical behaviour leads to lower levels of role conflict-intersender and higher levels of job satisfaction, but not higher performance. Research limitations/implications – To improve generalization of the findings, future research should broaden the sample by including a variety of industries. Likewise, the use of longitudinal data could provide new insights into the antecedents and consequences of ethical behaviour of salespeople and in particular the relationship with performance. Continuing research is needed to further analyse the relationship between ethical behaviour and other relevant behaviours that may take place during the interaction with the customer (e.g. organisational citizenship behaviours and customer orientation). Practical implications – This research is, to our knowledge, the first study that simultaneously identifies and analyses several key antecedents and consequences of the ethical behaviour of salespeople. Originality/value – This study adds to the literature by reducing the existing gap and showing companies insights into how to foster ethical sales behaviour and the positive consequences that this behaviour has on their salespeople. Keywords Business ethics, Sales force, Financial services Paper type Research paper

Introduction Sales professionals have been frequent targets of ethical criticism (Abratt and Penman, 2002). For example, the results of a Sales & Marketing Management survey of 200 sales managers revealed that 49 per cent of managers say their salespeople have lied on a sales call, 34 per cent say their salespeople have made unrealistic promises on a sales call and 22 per cent say their salespeople have sold products their customers did not need (Marchetti, 1997). There are several reasons for focusing specific attention on salespeople’s ethical behaviour. Salespeople are exposed to greater ethical pressures than individuals in many other jobs. They work in relatively unsupervised settings; they are primarily responsible for generating the firm’s revenues, which at times can be very stressful and they are often

European Journal of Marketing Vol. 39 No. 5/6, 2005 pp. 473-495 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0309-0566 DOI 10.1108/03090560510590674

EJM 39,5/6

474

evaluated on the basis of short-term objectives (Dubinsky et al., 1986; Bellizzi and Hite, 1989; Wotruba, 1990). In addition, research suggests that a salesperson’s ethical behaviour can play a critical role in the formation and maintenance of long-term buyer-seller relationships (Gundlach and Murphy, 1993; Roma´n and Ruiz, 2005). In contrast, unethical behaviour can even generate liability problems for salespeople’s organizations through both intentional and inadvertent statements (Boedecker et al., 1991). Despite the importance of understanding salespeople’s ethical behaviour, only a few studies have empirically addressed the determinants and consequences of such behaviour (Loe et al., 2000; McClaren, 2000) and none of them, to our knowledge, has simultaneously analysed its determinants and consequences. Therefore, the main purpose of this research is to gain a clearer understanding of several key determinants and consequences of the ethical behaviour of salespeople. By doing so, we will contribute to the marketing literature reducing the existing gap and we will show companies insights into how to foster ethical sales behaviour and the positive consequences that this behaviour has on their salespeople. The following sections develop the hypotheses, test them empirically and discuss implications of the findings. Research hypotheses Ethical sales behaviour The salesperson may behave unethically, when interacting with different stakeholders such as customers, competitors and employers. In the hierarchy of stakeholder importance, it appears that salespeople regard ethical transgressions against customers as being less ethical than any controversial actions against competitors or their employer (Chonko and Burnett, 1983; Chonko and Hunt, 1985). Accordingly, the focus of this research is on salespeople’s ethical behaviour as related to interactions with their customers. Ethical selling behaviour is a highly elusive construct and is often situation specific (Lagace et al., 1991). Nevertheless, it can be argued that ethics requires an individual to behave according to the rules of a moral philosophy with an emphasis on the determination of right and wrong (Gundlach and Murphy, 1993). More specifically, ethical sales behaviour is related to widely “recognized” societal norms such as fair play, honesty and full disclosure (Robertson and Anderson, 1993; Futrell, 2002). Consequently, in the context of this study, ethical sales behaviour is defined as fair and honest actions that enable the salesperson to foster long-term relationships with customers based on customer satisfaction and trust. Examples of such activities include: selling products that meet customers’ needs, providing true information about the product (e.g. when comparing with the competitors’ products, or in terms of its benefits or availability) and implementing low-pressure selling techniques (Chonko and Burnett, 1983; Dubinsky et al., 1991; Lagace et al., 1991; Reidenbach et al., 1991; Tansey et al., 1994; Verbeke et al., 1996; Singhapakdi et al., 1999). The conceptual model we propose is shown in Figure 1, namely that some organizational factors (reward system (RE) and salesforce control system (CS)) and some personal factors (age (AGE) and education (EDU)) affect the salesperson’s ethical behaviour. Further that this behaviour, in turn, influences the salesperson’s role conflict-intersender, performance and satisfaction. This research does not intend to examine all potential antecedents and consequences of ethical behaviour, rather it

An empirical study of salespeople 475

Figure 1. Conceptual model

represents a further step in the process of understanding how several key personal and organisational variables are related to ethical behaviour in the personal selling context. The logic for the choice of such variables and their hypothesised relationship with ethical sales behaviour is explained below. Determinants of ethical sales behaviour Reward and control system. The RE and CS have been found to be key managerial factors affecting salespersons’ actions. For instance, findings from Cravens et al. (1993) and Oliver and Anderson (1994) showed significant effects on customer-oriented selling, a behaviour that is closely related to ethical behaviour (Howe et al., 1994). We believe that the influence of the RE and CS on ethical behaviour deserves further attention. On the one hand, previous research analysing the relationship between the compensation system and ethics has led to mixed findings. Kurland (1996) did not find a significant relationship, whereas findings from Honeycutt et al. (2001) indicate that the firm’s reward structure significantly influenced the ethical behaviour of salespeople. On the other hand, past research has analysed the effect of a CS either on a salesperson’s ethical decision-making (Verbeke et al., 1996), or on a salesperson’s ethical judgments (Robertson and Anderson, 1993), but not on behaviour as reported by salespeople. This is the reason why Ross and Robertson (2003) recently called for continuing research to explore the relationship between the CS and ethical behaviour. The RE comprises a set of processes through which behaviours are directed and motivated to achieve individual and organizational goals (Chonko et al., 1996). Compensation plans emphasizing salary are recommended, when firms want their salespeople to adopt a long-term orientation and invest time servicing accounts to realize future sales. In contrast, plans emphasizing incentives are advocated, when firms want their salespeople to get immediate sales (John and Weitz, 1989; Howe et al., 1994). Results from Victor and Cullen (1988) indicated that commissioned sales organizations develop instrumental ethical climates characterised by statements such as “in this company, people are mostly out for themselves” and “people are

EJM 39,5/6

476

expected to do anything to further the company’s interests, regardless of the consequences”. In this vein, commission pay systems create a conflict of interest for the salesperson. On the one hand, it rewards salespeople to act in the firm’s interest, as well as their own interest, but fails to similarly directly reward salespeople to act in the customer’s interest (Kurland, 1995; 1999). This is the case, when the salesperson may find in his/her best interest to act unethically (e.g. by withholding information from the client) in order to make the sale and earn the commission (Kurland, 1999). In other words, commission-based compensation methods might motivate the salesperson to act in an unethical manner that will result in maximun sales. Such a motivation is likely to be absent in salary-based methods (Honeycutt et al., 2001). A salary-based compensation system is likely to encourage the salesperson to adopt a long-term perspective with his/her customers, since under this system the company assumes most of the risk of lost sales and the salesperson little, so he/she feels less pressure to get immediate sales, thereby reducing the changes of unethical practices being used (Robertson and Anderson, 1993). Empirical evidence from Kalra et al. (2003) indicated that, when the salesperson compensation derives a larger fraction of compensation based on sales commissions, there was an incentive to behave unethically. Accordingly, we propose the first hypothesis: H1. The higher the fixed salary percentage of the salesperson, the more ethical the salesperson’s behaviour. Salespeople are thought to behave differently depending on the CS they face (Anderson and Oliver, 1987). Initially, Anderson and Oliver (1987) defined a salesforce CS as “a set of procedures the organization has for monitoring, directing, evaluating and compensating its salespeople”. However, our definition of salesforce CS is more in line with recent studies that have considered the CS as a global construct, where the compensation component is not included (Verbeke et al., 1996; Piercy et al., 2001). This is consistent with John and Weitz’s (1989) argument that a CS predicts, but does not include, the style of compensation. A behaviour CS allows for non-sales goals, such as account maintenance and service. A longer perspective can be assumed because immediate results can be balanced with long-term sales relationships and outcomes (Oliver and Anderson, 1994). In contrast, in an outcome CS sales techniques may be compromised as short-run goals are pursued (Oliver and Anderson, 1994). In a behaviour-based CS managers are directive with their salespeople (they specify desired behaviour rather than settling for outputs, however achieved) and are well informed about their activities (behaviours or inputs). Consequently, the risk of detection and punishment of unethical behaviour is much higher in such systems (Robertson and Anderson, 1993; Verbeke et al., 1996). In other words, the existence of opportunities for unethical behaviour decreases in a behaviour-based CS and hence the salesperson is more likely to suffer any “cost” associated with behaving unethically. Results form Hunt and Vasquez-Parraga (1993) indicated that one of the advantages of behaviour-based CS is “the development and maintenance of an organizational culture that encourages ethical behaviour and discourages unethical behaviour”. Further research has shown that a behaviour-based CS significantly influences salespeople’s ethical judgments (Robertson and Anderson 1993) and salespeople’s

ethical decision-making (Verbeke et al. 1996). Similarly, results from Ramaswami (2002) showed that salespeople’s perceptions of output control were positively associated with their opportunistic behaviour. In summary, since behaviour-based CSs look at how salespeople reach goals, managers can outlaw undesirable and/or unethical procedures, which otherwise could have been used to obtain immediate sales. By the same token, managers can bring ethical procedures to the attention of their salespeople, therefore we propose that: H2. The more behaviour-based the salesforce CS, the more ethical the salesperson’s behaviour. Age and education. Among the personal antecedents, two clear empirical generalizations from the non-sales ethics literature are that, although the findings are not unanimous, older and more educated persons generally behave more ethically than younger and less educated persons (Browning and Zabriskie, 1983; Jones and Gautschi, 1988; Ruegger and King, 1992; Deshpande, 1997). These demographic variables are, in a sense, proxies for a cluster of personality or attitudinal characteristics that tend to be associated with these demographic characteristics (Ross and Robertson, 2003). Nevertheless, as indicated by McClaren (2000), because of the specific characteristics of the sales profession mentioned earlier, previous research has yielded inconclusive evidence regarding the effect of AGE and EDU on a salesperson’s ethical behaviour. For example, Hoffman et al. (1991) and Honeycutt et al. (2001) did not find a significant relationship between a salesperson’s AGE and his/her ethical behaviour. Results from Dubinsky et al. (1992) indicated that AGE had a significant impact on salespersons’ ethical perception, whereas EDU had no significant effect. Consequently, we shall further analyse the role of such demographic variables on ethical behaviour in the personal selling context. We expect older salespeople to be more ethical than younger salespeople for several reasons. First, as AGE increases, subjects have displayed more conservative and strict ethical tendencies and hold less compromising interpretations of what is to be judged ethical (Sikula and Costa, 1994). Second, ethical decision-making and intended ethical behaviour, in general, increases as individuals move from lower levels to higher levels of moral reasoning (Wotruba, 1990) and moral reasoning is directly linked to AGE (Rest, 1986). Third, older people have been exposed longer to ethical dilemmas in non-business contexts (Izzo, 2000), therefore they are more willing to accept and conform to ethical standards and behave accordingly (Serwinek, 1992). All the above leads us to propose the following: H3. The older the salesperson, the more ethical the salesperson’s behaviour. Despite the inconclusive findings mentioned above, we expect EDU to have a positive influence on a salesperson’s ethical behaviour. First, it can be argued that the educational process is designed to foster critical thinking and the ability to view situations from multiple perspectives (Levy and Sharma, 1994). In this sense, previous research has found that EDU is positively related to moral judgement (Rest and Thoma, 1985; Rest, 1986). Similarly, the effect of EDU on ethical behaviour can be supported by Kohlberg’s (1969) typology. EDU is believed to result in greater sensitivity to different points of view and to be linked to a person’s stage of cognitive

An empirical study of salespeople 477

EJM 39,5/6

478

moral development (Singhapakdi et al., 1999). A second possible link is the normative view that the core of EDU itself is virtue or right conduct (Hogness, 1986; Howard, 1989). Building upon the Socratic dictum “knowledge is virtue”, this classical view of EDU would suggest that the more educated would be the more virtues. Accordingly, we propose that: H4. The more educated the salesperson, the more ethical the salesperson’s behaviour. Consequences of ethical sales behaviour Role conflict-intersender. Following Rizzo et al. (1970), role conflict can be defined by the dimensions of congruency-incongruency or compatibility-incompatibility in the requirements of the salesperson role, where congruency or compatibility is judged relative to a set of standards that affect role performance. Role conflict can be conceptualized in terms of the following five conflict types or dimensions (Rizzo et al., 1970; Michaels et al., 1987; p. 31): intersender, intrasender, person-role, interrole and role overload. We shall focus on the relationship between ethical behaviour and role conflict-intersender. This type of role conflict occurs, when two or more role partners have simultaneous expectations, such that compliance with the expectations of one role partner makes it difficult or even impossible to fulfil the expectations of the other role partner(s) (Michaels et al., 1987). For example, salespeople may perceive role conflict-intersender, when simultaneously trying to meet company expectations and customer demands. A customer may demand better credit terms or quicker delivery schedules, which may be unacceptable to the management. Role conflict-intersender is likely to be the most pervasive and intensely felt conflict experienced by salespeople (Walker et al., 1975). Past research has produced mixed findings, when analysing the effect of ethical behaviour on role conflict. First, Chonko and Burnett (1983) provided empirical evidence for ethical sales behaviour reducing a salesperson’s role conflict. However, Dubinsky and Ingram (1984) did not find a significant relationship between these two variables. Recently, Turner and Valentine (2001), in a sample of customer service and sales personnel, found that cynicism (that represents a distrusting moral dimension) was positively related to role conflict. These studies considered role conflict as a global construct without explicating its dimensions. Based on research conducted by Singh (2000), we believe that the use of a disaggregated conceptualization of role conflict is likely to yield clearer results. Role conflict-intersender involves conflicting expectations from two or more role partners (Singh, 2000). Generally, the major sources of this type of role conflict are the company (employer) and the customers (Walker et al., 1975). The salesperson must try to satisfy the expectations of his/her company and his/her customers. On the one hand, recognizing the negative consequences of unethical sales behaviour mentioned above (e.g. decrease in customer satisfaction and trust, possible litigation), a company will expect its salespeople to behave ethically. On the other hand, customers try to satisfy their own objectives and needs in a sales transaction and are often unaware of the policies and constraints under which a salesperson is operating (Walker et al., 1975). Since, among other things, ethical selling behaviour implies taking into account

customers’ needs, when selling a product (e.g. by refraining from selling products that customers do not need) (Ingram et al., 2001), we propose that a salesperson’s ethical behaviour will reduce role conflict-intersender, at least by the percentage that is attributable to the conflicting expectations of the company and the customers. In a similar fashion, following Kelman’s (1958) theory of identification, in order to maintain a satisfying ego-identity, which is also known as the self-concept or self-image, the salesperson must maintain positive relationships with others, such as their customers, who support that positive self-image (Kelman, 1961). Interactions with customers who do not support this positive self-image are likely to lead to feelings of embarrassment and cognitive discomfort (O’Shaughnessy, 1971). When salespeople behave unethically (e.g. implementing manipulative sales tactics or high-pressure selling techniques), there may be a fear of personal rejection by the buyer, because the use of such actions is not supportive of positive relationships (Boyle and Dwyer, 1995). This fear of rejection, in turn, does not support a positive self-image and is likely to lead to feelings of stress and in particular, to increase a salesperson’s role conflict (McFarland, 2003). Stated formally: H5. The more ethical the salesperson’s behaviour, the lower the salesperson’s role conflict-intersender. Performance. Performance is comprised of behaviours (the activities salespeople perform) and outcomes resulting from behaviours; the former has been termed behavioural performance, whereas the latter is known as outcome performance (Behrman and Perrault, 1982; Grant and Cravens, 1996). In this study we shall focus on outcome performance, because it has been shown to be positively related to sales force effectiveness (Cravens et al., 1993; Grant and Cravens, 1999). The research to date provides little direction in terms of understanding the effect of ethical sales behaviour on performance. Literature on relationship building in sales may help. According to anecdotal literature, successful salespeople focus on customers, earn the customer’s trust and respect and develop partnership relationships with them (Manager’s Magazine, 1995; Schiffman, 1998). Likewise, empirical research shows that a salesperson’s ethical behaviour is positively related to customer trust and satisfaction, thus enhancing relationship quality and the probability of future rewards to the salesperson (Lagace et al., 1991; Roma´n and Ruiz, 2005). More importantly, buyers tend to purchase from salespeople they trust (Ganesan, 1994). Focusing on customers, building relationships based on satisfaction and trust, and making sales are generally part of a salesperson’s job. Consequently, it is plausible to expect that more ethical salespeople are more likely to achieve such goals and subsequently improve their performance. As for the empirical evidence, the study carried out by Weeks and Nantel (1992) showed that salespeople who understood their company’s ethical business policy were moderately successful in their jobs. Similarly, Honeycutt et al. (1995) found that high-performance salespeople showed high ethical behaviour and Schwepker and Ingram (1996) have provided empirical evidence of salespeople’s moral judgments as being positively related to their job performance. Recently, results from Turner and Valentine (2001) indicated that altruism and performance were positively correlated among salespeople. Accordingly we propose that:

An empirical study of salespeople 479

EJM 39,5/6

480

H6. The more ethical the salesperson’s behaviour, the greater the salesperson’s performance. Job satisfaction. Churchill et al. (1974) defined job satisfaction as: “all characteristics of the job itself and the work environment which salesmen find rewarding, fulfilling and satisfying or frustrating and unsatisfying”. In a non-sales context, Vitell and Davis (1990) found that management information systems professionals were less satisfied with their jobs when, unethical behaviour was common within either their industry or company. Empirical evidence from the sales literature shows that the job satisfaction of salespeople can be weakened if they perceive their organization as rewarding the unethical behaviours of co-workers (Bellizzi and Hite, 1989). Similarly, studies by Weeks and Nantel (1992) and Schwepker (2001) indicated that the code of ethics and the ethical climate respectively influenced a salesperson’s job satisfaction. Finally, the qualitative research of Beatty et al. (1996) noted that salespeople’s ethical behaviour (e.g. having customers’ best interests in mind and being honest to them) led to higher levels of job satisfaction. We expect that a salesperson’s ethical behaviour will have a positive impact on his/her job satisfaction. On the one hand, it can be argued that because of the negative consequences of unethical sales behaviour previously mentioned, a company will expect its salespeople to behave ethically. Thus, a salesperson who behaves ethically will comply with management expectations and will experience feelings of success, which in turn, will increase his/her job satisfaction (Brown et al., 1993). On the other hand, a salesperson is likely to be more satisfied with his/her work, most of which is carried out interacting with customers (Ingram et al., 2001), if he/she behaves ethically, such as not lying to customers or not applying deceptive and manipulative techniques. Finally, following Kelman’s (1958) theory of identification explained below, the practice of ethical sales behaviours supports a positive self-image and, consequently, is likely lead to feelings of satisfaction. This theorizing is summarized in the following hypothesis: H7. The more ethical the salesperson’s behaviour, the greater the salesperson’s job satisfaction. Role conflict-intersender and satisfaction. In addition to examining the direct effects of ethical behaviour on salesperson’s role conflict-intersender, performance and satisfaction, this study also proposes that ethical behaviour has an indirect and positive effect on satisfaction through role conflict-intersender. Role conflict has been negatively related to job satisfaction (Behrman and Perrault, 1984; Brown and Peterson, 1994; Mackenzie et al., 1998). Yet, results from Johnston et al. (1990) revealed that role conflict had no significant effect on job satisfaction. Consequently, prior research using a global conceptualization of role conflict has produced mixed findings. Once again, we believe that the use of a disaggregated conceptualization of role conflict is likely to yield clearer results (Singh, 2000). Accordingly, we expect that role conflict-intersender, which is the most pervasive and intensely felt conflict experienced by salespeople, is likely to reduce a salesperson’s job satisfaction. Role conflict-intersender occurs, when the salesperson tries to satisfy the often inconsistent demands of two or more of his/her role partners. For example, a customer wants lenient credit terms, but the credit manager wants to deal in short-term credit

with stringent terms. The salesperson may conclude that no matter what he/she does, someone will be upset with him. This kind of conflict can produce great anxiety and emotional turmoil for the salesperson, leading to disillusionment with the job (Churchill et al., 1976). Based on this reasoning, we formulate the last hypothesis of our model: H8. The lower the salesperson’s role conflict-intersender, the greater the salesperson’s job satisfaction.

Method Data collection and sample Based on the research of Dubinsky et al. (1991, 1992), salespeople from only one industry were surveyed to hold constant the type of product sold. Prior research has found that the job-related responses of salespeople vary across sales settings (Churchill et al., 1985). Accordingly, the cooperation of three financial service institutions in Spain of approximately the same size was obtained. Financial services are highly abstract services characterized by credence attributes and consequently difficult for consumers to fully understand. Hence, the consumer must rely on the agent for correct information and proper guidance (Howe et al., 1994). Therefore, financial services salespeople could, if they chose to act unethically, take advantage of the consumer’s naivety and improve their own position (Wray et al., 1994). Following Kelley (1992) and Boorom et al. (1998), questionnaires were administered during regularly scheduled meetings to a total of 280 financial services salespeople. All of them completed the questionnaires. Respondents were assured that their responses would be kept confidential and the questionnaires were immediately given to the researchers. In exchange for salespeople completing the questionnaires, we provided a sales training seminar following the data collection. The salespeople questioned were mainly specializing in selling high-involvement financial products (e.g. mortgages, life insurance) to final consumers. Each salesperson managed a portfolio of clients and was responsible for ongoing customer contact after the sale was closed. As shown in Table I, 83 per cent of them were male, 60 per cent were between 25 and 39 years old, 48 per cent had a college degree and 56 per cent had from 3 to 15 years of selling experience. In this sample, the total annual compensation percentage of fixed salary varies from a low of 10 per cent to a high of 95 per cent with a mean of 78 per cent. Measures In-depth interviews were first carried out with convenience samples of financial services salespeople in order to get a better understanding of the research variables. Additionally, preliminary versions of the questionnaire were administered[1], as pretest and results were used to improve measures and design an appropriate structure (see scale items in Appendix, Table AI). All scales consisted of ten-point multiple-item Likert questions except the RE, AGE and EDU. The last two were single-item questions as shown in Table I. Following Cravens et al. (1993), the RE was measured with the previous and current year percentages of fixed salary in the salesperson’s pay package. Salesforce CS was measured by a nine-item scale adapted from Oliver and Anderson (1994) and

An empirical study of salespeople 481

EJM 39,5/6

482

Table I. Profile of respondents ðn ¼ 280Þ

Gender Male Female Age , 25 25-32 33-39 40-45 45 þ Experience ,1 1-3 3-8 9-15 15 þ Education School graduation Diploma (High school) Undergraduate Degree I (three year-degree program) Undergraduate Degree II (five year-degree program)

Percent

Total

83.6 16.4

100

2.5 22.9 37.9 20 16.8

100

3.2 23.2 33.9 22.5 17.1

100

5.7 46.1 31.1 17.1

100

Verbeke et al. (1996). Following these authors, the CS was measured at the level of the individual as the perception of the salesperson about the CS he/she faces[2]. Since ethical sales behaviour is situation specific (Lagace et al., 1991), we first reviewed financial services literature looking for relevant unethical practices in the industry that take place during the salesperson-customer interaction (Mitchell et al., 1992; Dunfee and Gunther, 1999; Cooper and Frank, 2002; Roma´n, 2003). We selected the scale developed by Roma´n (2003), because it measures ethical sales behaviour from the customers’ perspective in the Spanish financial services industry. Next, we pre-tested this scale during in-depth interviews carried out with salespeople. Based on the results of these interviews a three-item scale adapted from Roma´n (2003) was used to measure the salesperson’s ethical behaviour (ESB). These items were consistent with previous unethical sales behaviours identified in the financial services literature and reflected the most predominant ethical problems faced in the Spanish financial services industry: “If I am not sure a product is right for a customer, I will still apply pressure to get him to buy”, “I stretch the truth about the competition in order to make my product more attractive to the customer” and “I lie about the availability of the product in order to make the sale”[3]. All items were reverse-scored. Therefore, a high score indicates a greater degree of ethical sales behaviour. This procedure of using negatively-expressed items to measure ethical behaviour is common practice in the ethics literature (Lagace et al., 1991; Honeycutt et al., 2001). Role conflict-intersender (RCI) was measured by the original two items that composed this dimension in Rizzo et al.’s (1970) scale. Performance (P) was measured by four items from the “outcome” performance dimension in Behrman and Perrault’s (1982) study. Following Dubinsky et al. (1986), job satisfaction (JS) was assessed by a three-item version of the Hackman and Oldhman’s (1976) scale.

A confirmatory factor analysis model for the six multi-item scales was carried out using the maximum likelihood procedure in LISREL 8.30 (Jo¨reskog and So¨rbon, 1996). Overall goodness-of-fit estimates of the measurement model suggests a good fit between theory and data (Table II). Reliability of the measures was confirmed with coefficient alpha higher than the recommended level of 0.7 (Nunnally, 1978). Also, all items loaded on their hypothesized factors and the estimates were positive and significant (the lowest t is 9.01) which provided evidence of convergent validity (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). Discriminant validity among the dimensions of each of the six concepts considered was assessed by restricting factor intercorrelations (F) pairwise to unity and subsequently computing a chi-square difference test (CDT), following Anderson and Gerbing’s (1988) suggestions. All model comparison statistics were significant, indicating that the null hypotheses of equal fit should be rejected, which provides evidence of discriminant validity. The estimated correlation matrix among the constructs is shown in Table III.

An empirical study of salespeople 483

Results The results of the structural model, shown in Table IV, provide support for all of the hypotheses formulated in the conceptual model except H4 and H6. That is to say, EDU does not influence ethical behaviour and ethical behaviour does not have a significant effect on performance. The model’s fit was acceptable when one takes into account the large sample size ðn ¼ 280Þ and the normed chi-square value ðx 2 =df ¼ 1:70Þ[4]. In addition, the CFI and the TLI are greater than 0.90 and the RMSEA and RMSR are not greater than 0.08 (Hair et al., 1998). Overall, the three significant antecedents accounted for 15 per cent of the variance in salesperson’s ethical behaviour. Research has already found several antecedents to ethical behaviour not included in our model such as cognitive moral development, CS

RE

CS1 0.71 (11.63) CS2 0.66 (10.71) CS3 0.71 (11.70) RE1 0.99 (23.58) RE2 0.93 (20.96) P1 0.79 P2 0.85 P3 0.80 P4 0.79 ESB1 ESB2 ESB3 JS1 JS2 JS3 RCI1 RCI2 x 2 ð104Þ ¼ 159:7; p , 0:01; x 2 =df ¼ 1:53; 0:04; RMSR ¼ 0:04; TLIðNNFIÞ ¼ 0:97 Note: t value in parenthesis

P

ESB

JS

RCI

(15.11) (16.89) (15.46) (15.20) 0.57 (9.68) 0.88 (15.13) 0.78 (13.31) 0.64 (11.87) 0.85 (16.98) 0.99 (21.28) 0.90 (10.16) 0.72 (9.01) GFI ¼ 0:93;

CFI ¼ 0:97;

RMSEA ¼

Table II. Estimated coefficients (standardized), t-values and fit statistics in the measurement

EJM 39,5/6

484 Table III. Correlations and reliability estimates

Coefficient alphas 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

CS RE P ESB AGE EDU JS RCI

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0.74 0.96 0.88 0.78 – – 0.86 0.78

1 0.02 1 0.03 2 0.04 1 0.30*** 0.14** 0.07 1 20.19*** 2 0.04 0.12** 0.10* 1 20.02 0.04 20.14** 20.02 2 0.22*** 1 0.43*** 2 0.04 0.11* 0.12* 0.10* 2 0.10* 1 20.31*** 0.05 20.07 20.10* 2 0.10* 0.05 2 0.27*** 1 Notes: *p , 0:1; **p , 0:05; ***p , 0:01

ethical intention, perceived competitive intensity, peer pressure and code of ethics (Wotruba, 1990; McClaren, 2000). Ethical behaviour explains 2 per cent of the variance in a salesperson’s role conflict-intersender, which can be expected given the fact that role conflict-intersender is caused by a number of different people including peers, other executives in the company and the salesperson’s family (Walker et al., 1975). Finally, ethical behaviour and role conflict-intersender explained 9 per cent of the variance in job satisfaction, which again might be expected due to the number of determinants of job satisfaction not considered in this conceptual model (Brown and Peterson, 1993).

A rival model It is generally agreed that researchers should compare rival models and not just test the performance of a proposed model (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988; Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). Our model posits that the RE, CS, AGE and EDU influence their outcomes only through the key mediating variable of ethical behaviour. Because our parsimonious model permits no direct path from any of the four variables to any outcome, it implies a central nomological status for ethical behaviour. Based on previous research, we estimated a rival model (less constrained model) that adds five new paths not considered in the conceptual model. Following research from Cravens et al. (1993) and Grant and Cravens (1996), the RE and the CS were hypothesized to influence performance. In addition, consistent with Goolsby (1992) and Michaels and Dixon (1994), EDU was also viewed as direct antecedents of role conflict-intersender. Based on empirical evidence from Churchill et al. (1985) and Babakus et al. (1999), a direct path from role conflict to performance was allowed to be estimated. Similarly, following Michaels et al. (1987) and Babakus et al. (1999), performance was hypothesized to influence job satisfaction. The rival model had a x 2 value of 231.51 with 135 degrees of freedom. The remaining fit statistics indicated an adequate fit of the data ( x 2 /df¼ 1.71 CFI ¼ 0.95; GFI ¼ 0.91; RMSEA ¼ 0.05; RMSR ¼ 0.08; TLI(NNFI) ¼ 0.93). However, the decrease of the chi-square between our proposed model and the rival model was not significant ð7x 2 ð5Þ ¼ 6:78; p . 0:1Þ. On the basis of these findings, we believe that the exercise of fitting a rival model has provided additional support for our conceptual model.

H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 H7 H8

RE(þ) ! ESB CS(þ ) ! ESB AGE(þ ) ! ESB EDU(þ) ! ESB ESB(2 ) ! RCI ESB(þ ) ! P ESB(þ ) ! JS RCI(2) ! JS

Standardized estimate

0.15 (2.31)** 0.35 (4.69)*** 0.19 (2.84)*** 0.002 (0.10) 20.12 (21.86)* 0.08 (1.11) 0.11 (1.70)* 20.26 (23.01)*** Notes: t value in parenthesis. *p , 0:1; **p , 0:05; ***p , 0:01

Hypothesis

Path Yes Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes

Hypothesis supported

0.02

0.15 0.09 0.005

R2

x 2 ð140Þ ¼ 238:29 p , 0:01 x 2 =df ¼ 1:70 GFI ¼ 0:91 CFI ¼ 0:95 RMSEA ¼ 0:05 RMSR ¼ 0:08 TLIðNNFIÞ ¼ 0:94

Fit statistics

An empirical study of salespeople 485

Table IV. Results of hypothesized model

EJM 39,5/6

486

Discussion This research is, to our knowledge, the first study that simultaneously identifies and analyses several key antecedents and consequences of the ethical behaviour of salespeople. We believe this research makes significant contributions to the literature. Firstly, Chonko et al. (1996) highlighted the importance of studying the consequences of sales management activities in salespeople’s ethical decision-making. We have responded to their challenge by analysing how the RE (H1) and CS (H2) affect salespeople’s ethical behaviour. Our results provide evidence that both systems are clear determinants of a salesperson’s ethical behaviour. The first finding contributes to the literature by providing further empirical evidence for the significant results obtained by Honeycutt et al. (2001) and also overcoming its main limitation: ethical behaviour was approached by a single-item measure, which may not have captured the nature of the variable. The second finding represents an initial step in providing empirical support for the positive effect of a behaviour-based CS on a salesperson’s ethical behaviour. Secondly, our results indicate that as The AGE of salespeople increases, they appear to become more conservative in their ethical behaviour (H3). It is important to take into account that though correlated with sales experience, age presents opportunities for role-taking resolution of ethical dilemmas in non-business contexts, which implies that an older salesperson has been exposed to either overt or implied ethical standards, thus being more apt to accept those standards and behave accordingly. On the contrary, it seems that a higher level of EDU does not have a direct impact on ethical behaviour (H4). A possible explanation is that EDU was measured as years of EDU, whereas the type of EDU and more specifically, ethical EDU may be a more important determinant of ethical behaviour (Izzo, 2000). Thirdly, previous research analyzing the relationship between ethical behaviour and role conflict has led to mixed findings (Chonko and Burnett, 1983; Dubinsky and Ingram, 1984). The use of a disaggregated conceptualization of role conflict has yielded clearer results, as our findings provide evidence of ethical behaviour reducing a salesperson’s role conflict-intersender (H5). Likewise, the results support the notion of ethical behaviour and role conflict-intersender as significant determinants of job satisfaction (H7 and H8). The first finding (H7) provides further empirical evidence to Beatty et al.’s (1996) results obtained through a qualitative research method and represents, to our knowledge, the first quantitative test of a salesperson’s ethical behaviour enhancing job satisfaction. The second finding (H8) implies that ethical behaviour has also an indirect effect on job satisfaction through role conflict and provides additional support for previous theoretical arguments and empirical evidence favouring the negative effect of role conflict on job satisfaction (Behrman and Perrault, 1984; Brown and Peterson, 1994). Finally, ethical sales behaviour does not seem to translate into short-term sales performance (H6), which warrants further discussion and analysis. This result can be attributed to a number of reasons. First, it is somewhat consistent with previous empirical research that has not found a significant relationship between ethical behaviour and performance (Honeycutt et al., 1995). Second, an organization’s RE may encourage, albeit unintentionally, the unethical conduct of salespeople. Salesperson’s behaviour (including unethical behaviour) that results in increased sales also increases agent commissions, which in turn reinforces the behaviour utilized to obtain those sales (Ferrell and Fraedrich, 1991). Hence this type of RE may tend to focus

salespeople’s efforts on activities with immediate payoffs (Lagace et al., 1991). Past studies have indicated that the unethical behaviour of top producing salespeople is more likely to be overlooked by sales managers thus perpetuating such behaviour among top performance salespeople (Bellizzi and Hite, 1989). Third, ethical salespeople are more likely to develop and maintain long-term buyer-salesperson relationships through the development of trust (Hawes et al., 1989), but not necessarily to increase short-term sales; which is consistent with Dubinsky et al.’s (1992) comments: “. . .at least in the short run, questionable conduct may engender selling success”. In addition, ethical behaviour may lead to higher sales only when salespeople are dealing with their relational customers as opposed to transactional customers. Relational customers could reward the ethical behaviour of the salesperson by continuing to place orders. Managerial implications We believe our findings have strong managerial implications because they suggest that variables under management control (compensation and CS) are more important in terms of explaining salespeople’s ethical behaviour as compared to demographic variables not directly controllable by the company (AGE and EDU). Companies need to foster a salesperson’s ethical behaviour not only because of the positive consequences to the salesperson in terms of higher job satisfaction and lower role conflict-intersender, but also because unethical sales behaviour can cause disputes with customers, possibly even resulting in litigation. We encourage corporations to create an environment where the potential for unethical behaviour is quite low. Accordingly, we suggest that sales managers should take time to communicate with their salespeople, assisting and guiding them to accurately view their day-to-day sales activity from an ethical perspective; then not reward them on a 100 per cent commission based on the sales made and evaluate their various activities, not just the outcomes achieved (sales volume). We do not imply that companies should avoid incentive programs, rather they could use a combination of base salary plus incentive pay in the form of commissions, bonuses or both based not only on the sales performance, but also on how well long-term objectives such as customer satisfaction have been achieved. In addition, since older salespeople seem to behave more ethically than younger ones, training program content should be adjusted to meet the needs of different age groups. For example, younger salespeople should be given material that emphasizes the importance of company ethical norms and values. Finally, these recommended managerial actions can be reinforced by some form of ethical code or rules to guide salespeople’s ethical behaviour and this code of ethics can be incorporated into the training program. Limitations and suggestions for future research To improve generalization of the findings, future research should broaden the sample by including a variety of industries. This study has been restricted to Spanish financial services salespeople and replication studies in other countries and other industries should prove useful. On the other hand, the three items used to measure ethical sales behaviour may not capture all the important aspects of this construct, yet it is generally acknowledged that “it is impossible to sample the entire domain of ethical behaviour” (Robertson and Anderson, 1993, p. 638). Since salespeople were asked to evaluate their ethical

An empirical study of salespeople 487

EJM 39,5/6

488

behaviour, there may have been a tendency for respondents to deny socially undesirable traits (e.g. unethical behaviour) given the likelihood of a social desirability bias (Nederhof, 1985). However, if there were to be a bias it may be shared by all respondents (Churchill et al., 1985). Moreover, this approach to measuring ethical sales behaviour has been successfully implemented in previous research (Howe et al., 1994; Honeycutt et al., 2001) and has an advantage over using projective techniques in that self-reported behaviour is being measured, reducing the possibility of interpretations changing across different observers (Korner, 1965). In addition, since the data were collected cross-sectionally using self-report measures, the potential for common methods variance exists. Following Podsakoff and Organ (1986), we tested for this bias using Harman’s one-factor approach. A principal components analysis (unconstrained number of factors with varimax rotation) on the 23-questionnaire items (variables measured with one item were not included) yielded eight factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0, accounting for 80 per cent of the total variance. Given the emergence of several factors and given that the first factor accounted for only 24 per cent of the total variance, common methods bias does not appear to be present in the dataset (Podsakoff and Organ, 1986). Our findings, which validate the important role of the RE and CS in fostering ethical behaviour, can serve as a useful starting point for this stream of research that may include other relevant organisational variables such as perceived organizational support, socialization, training and market orientation. In addition, continuing research is needed to further analyse the relationship between ethical sales behaviour and other relevant behaviours that may take place during the interaction with the customer. For example, previous research has found that ethical sales behaviour was highly correlated to organisational citizenship behaviour (Turnipseed, 2002) and customer oriented selling (Roma´n et al., 2002). We have considered ethical sales behaviour in dealing with customers. One potential area for future research would be to consider ethical behaviour related to other stakeholders such as peers, employers or competitors. This would also allow additional research to examine the relationship between ethical behaviour and performance in-depth by taking into account other dimensions of sales performance such as using technical knowledge, providing information, controlling expenses and making sales presentations (Behrman and Perrault, 1982). Moreover, the use of longitudinal data could help in understanding this relationship. Ethical intention was not measured in this study; however, additional research should attempt to explain the roles of ethical perception and ethical intention in explaining ethical behaviour. Notes 1. Since the questionnaire was administered in Spanish, the questionnaire was drafted originally in English and translated into Spanish. The questionnaire was then translated back into English and checked for consistency with the original to ensure that any idiomatic or colloquialistic wording was minimized (Douglas and Craig, 1983). 2. Bagozzi and Baumgartner (1994) recommended that three sub-scale composites be developed as multiple indicators of scales with more than five items. Consequently, maximum likelihood factor analysis with an oblique rotation was used to guide the development of three summated sub-scale composites of CS (Lastovicka and Thamodaran, 1991). Then, the three indicators of the control system (CS1, CS2 and CS3) were used in the confirmatory factor analysis.

3. The term availability for banking products/services is referring, for example, to the period of time the customer has to wait between ordering a credit card and actually being able to use it, or the gap between having a bank loan approved and the money being available. 4. In samples larger than 200 Hair et al. (1998) suggest using the normed chi-square (x 2/df), which indicates a good fit when its value ranges from 1 to 2.

An empirical study of salespeople 489

References Abratt, R. and Penman, N. (2002), “Understanding factors affecting salespeople’s perceptions of ethical behavior in South Africa”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 35, pp. 269-80. Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-23. Anderson, E. and Oliver, R.L. (1987), “Perspectives on behavior-based versus outcome-based salesforce control systems”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51, pp. 76-88. Babakus, E., Cravens, D.W., Johnston, M. and Moncrief, W.C. (1999), “The role of emotional exhaustion in sales force attitude and behavior relationships”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 59-70. Bagozzi, R.P. and Baumgartner, H. (1994), “The evaluation of structural equation models and hypothesis testing”, in Bagozzi, R.P. (Ed.), Principles of Marketing Science, Blackwell, Cambridge, MA, pp. 386-422. Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 74-94. Beatty, S.E., Mayer, M., Coleman, J.E., Reynolds, K.E. and Lee, J. (1996), “Customer-sales associate retail relationships”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 72 No. 3, pp. 223-47. Behrman, D.N. and Perrault, W.D. Jr (1982), “Measuring the performance of industrial salespersons”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 10, pp. 335-70. Behrman, D.N. and Perrault, W.D. Jr (1984), “A role stress model of the performance and satisfaction of industrial salesperson”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 48, pp. 9-21. Bellizzi, J.A. and Hite, R.E. (1989), “Supervising unethical salesforce behavior”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53, pp. 36-47. Boedecker, K.A., Morgan, F.W. and Stoltman, J.J. (1991), “Legal dimensions of salesperson’s statements: a review and managerial suggestions”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 55, pp. 70-80. Boorom, M.L., Goolsby, J.R. and Ramsey, R.P. (1998), “Relational communication traits and their effect on adaptiveness and sales performance”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 16-30. Boyle, B. and Dwyer, R. (1995), “Power, bureaucracy, influence, and performance: their relationships in industrial distribution channels”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 32, pp. 189-200. Brown, S.P. and Peterson, R.A. (1993), “Antecedents and consequences of salesperson job satisfaction: meta-analysis and assessment of casual effects”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30, pp. 63-77. Brown, S.P. and Peterson, R.A. (1994), “The effect of effort on sales performance and job satisfaction”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, pp. 70-80. Brown, S.P., Cron, W.L. and Leigh, T.W. (1993), “Do feelings of success mediate sale performance-work attitude relationships”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 91-100.

EJM 39,5/6

490

Browning, J. and Zabriskie, N.B. (1983), “How ethical are industrial buyers?”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 12, pp. 219-24. Chonko, L.B. and Burnett, J.J. (1983), “Measuring the importance of ethical situations as a source of role conflict: a survey of salespeople, sales managers, and sales support personnel”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 3, pp. 41-7. Chonko, L.B. and Hunt, S.D. (1985), “Ethics and marketing management: an empirical investigation”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 13, pp. 339-59. Chonko, L.B., Tanner, F.J Jr and Weeks, W. (1996), “Ethics in salesperson decision making: a synthesis of research approaches and an extension of the scenario method”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 16, pp. 35-52. Churchill, G.A., Ford, J.N. and Walker, O.C. Jr (1974), “Measuring the job satisfaction of industrial salesmen”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 11, pp. 254-60. Churchill, G.A., Ford, J.N. and Walker, O.C. Jr (1976), “Organizational climate and job satisfaction in the salesforce”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 13, pp. 323-32. Churchill, G.A., Ford, J.N., Hartley, S.W. and Walker, O.C. Jr (1985), “The determinants of salespeople performance: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 22, pp. 103-18. Cooper, R.W. and Frank, G.L. (2002), “Ethical challenges in the two main segments of the insurance industry: key considerations in the evolving financial services marketplace”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 36, pp. 5-20. Cravens, D.W., Ingram, T.N., LaForge, R.W. and Young, C.E. (1993), “Behavior-based and outcome-based salesforce control systems”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, pp. 47-59. Deshpande, S.P. (1997), “Managers’ perceptions of proper ethical conduct: the effect of sex, age, and level of education”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 16, pp. 79-85. Douglas, S. and Craig, C.S. (1983), International Marketing Research, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Dubinsky, A.J. and Ingram, T.N. (1984), “Correlates of salespeople’s ethical conflict: an exploratory investigation”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 3, pp. 343-53. Dubinsky, A.J., Howell, R.D., Ingram, T.N. and Bellenger, D.N. (1986), “Salesforce socialization”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 192-207. Dubinsky, A.J., Jolson, M.A., Kotabe, M. and Lim, C.U. (1991), “A cross national investigation of industrial salespeoples ethical perceptions”, Journal of International Business Studies, pp. 651-70. Dubinsky, A.J., Jolson, M.A., Michaels, R.E., Kotabe, M. and Lim, C.U. (1992), “Ethical perceptions of field sales personnel: an empirical assessment”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 9-21. Dunfee, T.W. and Gunther, R. (1999), “Ethical issues in financial services”, Business & Society Review, Vol. 104, pp. 5-10. Ferrell, O.C. and Fraedrich, J. (1991), Business Ethics, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA. Futrell, C.M. (2002), Fundamentals of Selling: Customers for Life, 7th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Ganesan, S. (1994), “Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, pp. 1-19. Goolsby, J.R. (1992), “A theory of role stress in boundary spanning positions of marketing organizations”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 155-64.

Grant, K. and Cravens, D.W. (1996), “Examining sales force performance in organizations that use behavior-based sales management processes”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 25, pp. 361-71. Grant, K. and Cravens, D.W. (1999), “Examining the antecedents of sales organization effectiveness: an Australian study”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33 Nos 9/10, pp. 945-57. Gundlach, G.T. and Murphy, P.E. (1993), “Ethical and legal foundations of relational marketing exchanges”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, pp. 35-46. Hackman, J.R. and Oldhman (1976), “Motivation though the design of work: test of a theory”, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 16, pp. 250-79. Hair, J.F. Jr, Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Hawes, J.M., Mast, K.E. and Swan, J.E. (1989), “Trust earning perceptions of sellers and buyers”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 9, pp. 1-8. Hoffman, K.D., Howe, V. and Hardigree, D.W. (1991), “Ethical dilemmas faced in the selling of complex services: significant others and competitive pressures”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 11, pp. 13-25. Hogness, J.R. (1986), “The essence of education: ethics and morality”, Vital Speeches, Vol. 52, pp. 561-3. Honeycutt, E.D., Siguaw, J.A. and Hunt, T.G. (1995), “Business ethics and job-related constructs: a cross- cultural comparison of automotive salespeople”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 14, pp. 235-48. Honeycutt, E.D., Glassman, M., Zugelder, M.T. and Karande, K. (2001), “Determinants of ethical behavior: a study of autosalespeople”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 32, pp. 69-79. Howard, J.A. (1989), “Higher education and a civilization in trouble: producing a virtuous populace”, Vital Speeches, Vol. 55, pp. 314-8. Howe, V., Hoffman, K.D. and Hardigree, D. (1994), “The relationship between ethical and customer-oriented service provider behaviors”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 13, pp. 497-506. Hunt, S.D. and Vasquez-Parraga, A.Z. (1993), “Organizational consequences marketing ethics, and salesforce supervision”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30, pp. 78-90. Ingram, T.M., Laforge, R.W., Avila, R.A., Schwepker, C.H. Jr and Williams, M.R. (2001), Professional Selling: A Trust-Based Approach, Hartcourt, Orlando, FL. Izzo, G. (2000), “Compulsory ethics education and the cognitive moral development of salespeople: a quasi-experimental assessment”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 28, pp. 223-41. John, G. and Weitz, B. (1989), “Salesforce compensation: an empirical investigation of factors related to use of salary versus incentive compensation”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26, pp. 1-14. Johnston, M.W., Parasuraman, A., Futrell, C.M. and Black, W.C. (1990), “A longitudinal assessment of the impact of selected organizational influences on salespeople’s organizational commitment during early employment”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 27, pp. 333-44. Jones, T.M. and Gautschi, F.H. (1988), “Will the ethics of business change? A survey of future executives”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 7, pp. 231-48. ¨ Joreskog, K. and So¨rbon, D. (1996), LISREL 8: User’s Reference Guide, 2nd ed., Scientific Software International, Chicago, IL.

An empirical study of salespeople 491

EJM 39,5/6

492

Kalra, A., Shi, M. and Srinivasan, K. (2003), “Salesforce compensation scheme and consumer inferences”, Management Science, Vol. 49 No. 5, pp. 655-72. Kelley, S.W. (1992), “Developing customer orientation among service employees”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 27-36. Kelman, H.C. (1958), “Compliance identification, and internalization: three processes of attitude change”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 51-60. Kelman, H.C. (1961), “Process of opinion change”, Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 25, pp. 57-78. Kohlberg, L. (1969), Stage and Sequence: The Cognitive Developmental Approach to Socialization, Rand McNally, New York, NY. Korner, A.E. (1965), “Theoretical considerations concerning the scope and limitations of projective techniques”, in Murstein, B.I. (Ed.), Handbook of Projective Techniques, Basic Books, New York, NY. Kurland, N.B. (1995), “The unexplored territory linking rewards and ethical behavior”, Business & Society, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 34-50. Kurland, N.B. (1996), “Sales agents and clients: ethics, incentives, and a modified theory of planned behavior”, Human Relations, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 51-74. Kurland, N.B. (1999), “Zicklin conference. Ethics and commission”, Business & Society Review, Vol. 104 No. 1, pp. 29-33. Lagace, R.R., Dahlstrom, R. and Gassenheimer, J.B. (1991), “The relevance of ethical salesperson behavior on relationship quality: the pharmaceutical industry”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 11, pp. 39-47. Lastovicka, J.L. and Thamodaran, K. (1991), “Common factor score estimates in multiple regression problems”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28, pp. 105-12. Levy, M. and Sharma, A. (1994), “Adaptive selling: the role of gender, age, sales experience, and education”, Journal Business Research, Vol. 31, pp. 39-47. Loe, T.W., Ferrell, L. and Mansfield, P. (2000), “A review of empirical studies assessing ethical decision making in business”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 25, pp. 185-204. McClaren, N. (2000), “Ethics in personal selling and sales management: a review of the literature focusing on empirical findings and conceptual foundations”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 27, pp. 285-303. McFarland, R.G. (2003), “Crisis of conscience: the use of coercive sales tactics and resultant felt stress in the salesperson”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 23, pp. 309-23. MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M. and Ahearne, M. (1998), “Some possible antecedents and consequences of in-role and extra-role salesperson performance”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62, pp. 87-98. Manager’s Magazine (1995), “The secrets of highly successful salespeople”, Manager’s Magazine, Vol. 70 No. 9, p. 3. Marchetti, M. (1997), “Whatever it takes”, Sales & Marketing Management, pp. 29-38. Michaels, R.E. and Dixon, A.L. (1994), “Sellers and buyers on the boundary: potential moderators of role stress-job outcome relationships”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 62-73. Michaels, R.E., Day, R.L. and Joachimsthaler, E.A. (1987), “Role stress among industrial buyers: an integrative model”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51, pp. 28-45.

Mitchell, W.J., Lewis, P.W. and Reinsch, N.L. Jr (1992), “Bank ethics: an exploratory study of ethical behaviors and perceptions in small, local banks”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 21, pp. 197-205. Nederhof, A.J. (1985), “Methods of coping with social desirability bias: a review”, European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 15, pp. 263-80. Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, NY. O’Shaughnessy, J (1971), “Selling as an interpersonal influence process”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 47, pp. 32-46. Oliver, L.R. and Anderson, E. (1994), “An empirical test of the consequences of behavior and outcome-based sales control systems”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, pp. 53-67. Piercy, N.F., Cravens, D. and Lane, N. (2001), “Sales manager behavior control strategy and its consequences: the impact of gender differences”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 21, pp. 39-51. Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D. (1986), “Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 12, pp. 531-43. Ramaswami, S. (2002), “Influence of control systems on opportunistic behaviors of salespeople: a test of gender differences”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 22, pp. 173-88. Reidenbach, R.E., Robin, D.P. and Dawson, L. (1991), “An application and extension of a multidimensional ethics scale to selected marketing practices and marketing groups”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 83-92. Rest, J.R. (1986), Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory, Praeger Publishers, New York, NY. Rest, J.R. and Thoma, S. (1985), “Relation of moral judgement development to formal education”, Development Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 709-14. Rizzo, J.R., House, R.J. and Lirtzman, S.J. (1970), “Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 15, pp. 150-63. Robertson, D.C. and Anderson, E. (1993), “Control system and task environment effects on ethical judgment: an exploratory study of industrial salespeople”, Organization Science, Vol. 4, pp. 617-45. Roma´n, S. (2003), “The impact of ethical sales behaviour on customer satisfaction trust and loyalty to the company: an empirical study in the financial services industry”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 19 Nos 9/10, pp. 915-49. Roma´n, S. and Ruiz, S. (2005), “Relationship outcomes of perceived ethical sales behavior: the customer’s perspective”, Journal of Business Research, in press. Roma´n, S., Munuera, J.L. and Ruiz, S. (2002), “Customer-oriented selling, salesperson’s role stress and performance: an alternative perspective”, Proceedings of the 31st EMAC Conference, Braga. Ross, W.T. and Robertson, D.C. (2003), “A typology of situational factors: impact on salesperson decision-making about ethical issues”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 46, pp. 213-34. Ruegger, D. and King, E.W. (1992), “A study of the effect of age and gender upon student business ethics”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 11, pp. 179-86. Schiffman, S. (1998), “Successful salespeople know how to lead”, The American Salesman, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 28-31.

An empirical study of salespeople 493

EJM 39,5/6

494

Schwepker, C.H. (2001), “Ethical climates relationship to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intention in the salesforce”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 54, pp. 39-54. Schwepker, C.H. and Ingram, T. (1996), “Improving sales performance through ethics: the relationship between salesperson moral judgement and job performance”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 15, pp. 1151-60. Serwinek, P.J. (1992), “Demographic & related differences in ethical views among small business”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 11, pp. 555-66. Sikula, A. and Costa, A.D. (1994), “Are age and ethics related?”, The Journal of Psychology, Vol. 128 No. 6, pp. 659-65. Singh, J. (2000), “Perfomance productivity and quality of frontline employees in service organizations”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 64, pp. 15-34. Singhapakdi, A., Vitell, S.J. and Franke, G.R. (1999), “Antecedents, consequences, and mediating effects of perceived moral intensity and personal moral philosophies”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 19-36. Tansey, R., Brown, G., Hyman, M.R. and Dawson, L.E. Jr (1994), “Personal moral philosophies and the moral judgements of salespeople”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 14, pp. 59-75. Turner, J.H. and Valentine, S.R. (2001), “Cynicism as a fundamental dimension of moral decision-making: a scale development”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 34, pp. 123-36. Turnipseed, D.L. (2002), “Are good soldiers good? Exploring the link between organization citizenship behavior and personal ethics”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55, pp. 1-15. Verbeke, W., Ouwerkerk, C. and Peelen, E. (1996), “Exploring the contextual and individual factors on ethical decision making of salespeople”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 15, pp. 1175-87. Victor, B. and Cullen, J.B. (1988), “The organizational bases of ethical work climates”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 33, pp. 101-25. Vitell, S.J. and Davis, D.L. (1990), “The relationship between ethics and job satisfaction”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 9, pp. 489-94. Walker, O.C., Churchill, G.A. Jr and Ford, N.M. (1975), “Organizational determinants of the industrial salesman’s role conflict and ambiguity”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 32-9. Weeks, W.A. and Nantel, J. (1992), “Corporate code of ethics and sales force behavior: a case study”, Journal of Business Ethic, Vol. 11, pp. 753-60. Wotruba, T. (1990), “A comprehensive framework for the analysis of ethical behavior, with a focus on sales organisations”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 10, pp. 29-42, Spring. Wray, B., Palmer, A. and Bejou, D. (1994), “Using neural network analysis to evaluate buyer-seller relationships”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 10, pp. 32-48. Further reading Buckley, M.R., Beu, D.S., Frink, D.D., Howard, J.L., Berkson, H., Mobbs, T.A. and Ferris, G.R. (2001), “Ethical issues in human resources systems”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 11, pp. 11-29. Dubinsky, A.J. and Hartley, S.W. (1986), “A path-analytic study of a model of salesperson performance”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 14, pp. 36-46. Libby, B. and Agnello, V. (2000), “Ethical decision making and the law”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 26, pp. 223-32.

Pain, L.S. (1994), “Managing for organizational integrity”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 72 No. 2, pp. 106-17. Trawick, I.F., Swan, J.E., Mcgee, G.W. and Rink, D.R. (1991), “Influence of buyer ethics and salesperson behavior on intention to choose a supplier”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 17-23.

An empirical study of salespeople 495

Appendix Ethical sales behaviour (scale: the statements below describe various ways you may act with your customers. For each statement please indicate to what extent you behave that way. . .: 1 ¼ “never” 10 ¼ “always”) ESB1. If I am not sure a product is right for a customer, I will still apply pressure to get him to buy a ESB2. I stretch the truth about the competition in order to make my product more attractive to the customer ESB3. I lie about the availability of the product in order to make the sale Reward system (scale: percentage of fixed salary in compensation plan. . .) RE1. Present pay period RE2. Last pay period Control systemb Subjective Input Evaluation (CS1) (scale: how heavily do you think your manager relies on these kinds of measures in evaluating your performance. . .: 1¼ “doesn’t use at all” to 10 ¼ “uses extensively”) Attitude Ability Effort Absence of A Bottom-Line Orientation (CS2) (scale: evaluate each statement to reflect to what degree you agree or disagree with them. . .: 1 ¼ “I strongly disagree” to 10 ¼ “I strongly agree”) When management rates my performance, they take a lot of things into consideration Management decides who is good by looking strictly at each salesperson’s behaviour Management leaves us alone as long as our results are ok Extent of Supervision (CS3) (scale: evaluate each statement to reflect to what degree you agree or disagree with them. . .: 1 ¼ “I strongly disagree” to 10 ¼ “I strongly agree”) My boss makes sure everyone knows what to do and how to do it Management here stays very well informed of salespeople’s activities We are subject to very little direction from our company’s management Role Conflict-Intersender (scale: indicate to what degree do the following things happen in your job. . .: 1 ¼ “never” to 10 ¼ “always”) RCI1. I receive incompatible requests from two or more people RCI2. I do things that are apt to be accepted by one person and not accepted by others Performance (scale: evaluate your performance. . .: 1 ¼ “needs improvement” to 10 ¼ “outstanding”) P1. Produce a high market share for the company in my territory P2. Quickly generating sales of new company products P3. Identifying and selling to major accounts in my territory P4. Exceeding all sales targets and objectives in my territory during the year Job satisfaction (scale: evaluate each statement to reflect to what degree you agree or disagree with them. . .: 1 ¼ “I strongly disagree” to 10 ¼ “I strongly agree”) JS1. I frequently think about quitting this job JS2. I am satisfied with the kind of activities I perform everyday JS3. Generally speaking, I am very satisfied with this job Notes: aItems in italic are reverse-scored. bA high score indicates a greater degree of behaviour-based control system

View publication stats

Table AI. Scale items