Does choice of sales control conceptualization matter? An empirical comparison of existing conceptualizations and directions for future research

Abstract

Sales controls represent an important area of sales research. Unfortunately, knowledge to date tends to be fragmented in that prior work has followed one of the two notable conceptualizations which, however, take a different route to studying sales controls: the Oliver and Anderson (O&A) index and the Jaworski and Colleagues (J&C) measures. Consequently, important questions remain unaddressed: Does choice of sales control conceptualization matter to sales research? What is the degree of similarity between the two conceptualizations and how do they compare against measurement qualities and effects on performance? Drawing on a unique dataset that matches survey data to objective, time-lagged, firm financial performance data, we reveal that choice of sales control conceptualization matters. Surprisingly, unlike current assumptions, the O&A index, is equally related to J&C's output and process controls whereas it reflects both formal and informal types of control. Analyses show that at least some components of the O&A index are not identical to J&C's process or output controls and thus measures from each conceptualization cannot be substituted. Moreover, the size and nature of sales controls’ effects on sales force performance differ depending on the conceptualization employed, thus strengthening the view that the two conceptualizations should not be used interchangeably. Finally, results reveal an intriguing pattern of nonlinear effects such as that – beyond a certain point – process (but not behavioral) control may be detrimental to customer relationship performance. We conclude by contributing ideas on how to move forward with the development of a new, modern measure of sales control.