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

net/publication/319432638

Product knowledge and salesperson performance: rethinking the role of

optimism

Article  in  Marketing Intelligence & Planning · September 2017

DOI: 10.1108/MIP-11-2016-0199

CITATIONS READS

11 3,829

2 authors:

Vinita Sangtani Feisal Murshed

University of North Georgia Kutztown University
6 PUBLICATIONS   218 CITATIONS    15 PUBLICATIONS   230 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Hedonic shopping motivations across cultures View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Feisal Murshed on 30 July 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Marketing Intelligence & Planning
Product knowledge and salesperson performance: rethinking the role of optimism
Vinita Sangtani, Feisal Murshed,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Vinita Sangtani, Feisal Murshed, (2017) "Product knowledge and salesperson performance:
rethinking the role of optimism", Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 35 Issue: 6, pp.724-739,
https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-11-2016-0199
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

Permanent link to this document:

https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-11-2016-0199
Downloaded on: 04 October 2017, At: 03:58 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 48 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 38 times since 2017*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2017),"The brand meaning co-creation process on Facebook", Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, Vol. 35 Iss 7 pp. 923-936 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-09-2016-0171">https://
doi.org/10.1108/MIP-09-2016-0171</a>
(2015),"Diners’ loyalty toward luxury restaurants: the moderating role of product knowledge",
Marketing Intelligence &amp; Planning, Vol. 33 Iss 2 pp. 179-196 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/
MIP-03-2014-0049">https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-03-2014-0049</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by Emerald Staff
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.


MIP
35,6
724
Received 1 November 2016
Revised 23 April 2017
Accepted 28 April 2017
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)
Marketing Intelligence & Planning
Vol. 35 No. 6, 2017
pp. 724-739
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0263-4503
DOI 10.1108/MIP-11-2016-0199
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-4503.htm
Product knowledge and
salesperson performance:
rethinking the role of optimism
Vinita Sangtani
University of North Georgia, Dahlonega, Georgia, USA, and
Feisal Murshed
Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, Kutztown, Pennsylvania, USA
Abstract
Purpose – Based on knowledge-based view of the firm, and salesperson attributions, the purpose of this
paper is to develop and test a contingency-based framework featuring how salespeople’s product knowledge:
product and brand knowledge (PBK) and competitors’ product and brand knowledge (CPBK) and optimism
impact salesperson performance.
Design/methodology/approach – Hypotheses are tested on survey data from 185 car salespeople in
Southeast USA.
Findings – Results document support for the main effects of PBK, CPBK, and their joint effects.
Furthermore, under high optimism, the positive impact of CPBK on salesperson performance is attenuated.
However, optimism × PBK interaction was not supported.
Research limitations/implications – Extant literature lacks insights into the impact of salespeople’s
product knowledge. By examining salespeople’s product knowledge in a disaggregated fashion, and the
interaction of product knowledge × optimism, this research highlights the multi-dimensional nature of
product knowledge, whose complex ramifications cannot otherwise be uncovered by a globally
conceptualized construct.
Originality/value – This study isolates salespeople’s domain-specific knowledge of products from the more
global construct of salespeople’s knowledge. The focus on how PBK and CPBK exert a joint positive influence
on performance is novel. In addition, by examining how optimism weakens the relationship between CPBK
and performance, this research provides a notable contrast to extant findings and broadens the learned
optimism paradigm.
Keywords Optimism, Salesperson performance, Product knowledge, Attribution theory,
Knowledge-based view of firm
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Researchers exalt knowledge as essential to superior performance (Spender and Grant,
1996). Grounded in a knowledge-based view (KBV, hereafter) of the firm, this perspective
has inspired research in strategy (Menon and Pfeffer, 2003) and marketing (e.g. De Luca
and Atuahene-Gima, 2007). With customers increasingly seeking value-added solutions and
responsiveness from salespeople, application of specialized skills and knowledge is
critical for a sales organization (Sheth and Sharma, 2008). It is estimated that salespeople’s
knowledge structure can explain 50 percent of the variance in sales performance
(Sharma et al., 2007).
Although it is recognized that salespeople’s knowledge is a critical driver of performance,
past research does not adequately tap the domain of the more fine-grained construct of
salespeople’s product knowledge, and empirical evidence of its impact on sales performance
is rather limited. A notable exception is a recent study that examines how salespeople’s
product knowledge interacts with salesforce automation systems (Mariadoss et al., 2014).
This research seeks to add conceptual richness to the construct of salespeople’s product
knowledge by identifying its different domains and parsing their distinct effects on performance.
Extending theoretical developments in the KBV of the firm (Spender and Grant, 1996),
 this study focuses on two specific descriptors of salespeople’s product knowledge: salespeople’s Product
knowledge depth, i.e., knowledge about products and brands they sell: product and brand knowledge and
knowledge (PBK, hereafter); and salespeople’s knowledge breadth, i.e., knowledge of competitors’ salesperson
products: competitors’ product and brand knowledge (CPBK, hereafter). PBK is internally built
knowledge; whereas CPBK, acquired through an outside-in process, represents an external performance
knowledge. As there is a clear need to understand how PBK and CPBK might jointly affect
performance, this research also examines the PBK × CPBK interaction. 725
The sales profession is perceived as a challenging and failure-prone occupation
(Boichuk et al., 2014) and in accordance, previous research acknowledges that in addition to
possessing requisite knowledge bases, salespeople also need appropriate coping strategies to
excel (Strutton and Lumpkin, 1993). Individual differences, such as level of optimism, shape an
individual’s response to challenging situations and negative outcomes (Dixon and Schertzer,
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

2005), and optimistic salespeople are more likely to be successful in dealing with stressful
encounters (Strutton and Lumpkin, 1993). This research examines the intriguiging possibility
of optimism’s directionally dissimilar impact on the knowledge-performance relationship.
Specifically, drawing on attribution theory (Dixon et al., 2001; Weiner, 1985), this research
proposes that optimism enhances the effect of PBK on performance, and conversely, it
mitigates the effect of CPBK on performance. We test the proposed model using primary data
through a survey of 185 automobile salespeople.
The contribution of this work is threefold. First, by addressing knowledge management
issues, this research enriches the application of knowledge-related work in sales management
literature (Leigh et al., 2014; Madhavaram and McDonald, 2010). Drawing on KBV of the firm,
this research conceptualizes and empirically isolates salespeople’s domain-specific knowledge
of products (PBK and CPBK) from the more global construct of salespeople’s knowledge. At the
same time, delineating the typology of PBK and CPBK brings into sharp focus organizational
issues of knowledge depth and knowledge breadth, respectively (De Luca and Atuahene-Gima,
2007). PBK, an internal knowledge construct, is readily accessible, and cheaper to obtain.
In contrast, CPBK, representing external knowledge, requires a greater expenditure of time and
effort to obtain. Second, by examining the PBK × CPBK interaction, this research affords the
opportunity to shed new insights into a relatively unexplored area. This approach elaborates
on the interplay between internal (related to own product) and external (related to competitors’
products) knowledge bases (Menon and Pfeffer, 2003; Prabhu et al., 2005).
Third, drawing from the attribution process model (e.g. DeCarlo et al., 1997), this study
develops systematic theory and empirical evidence for the heretofore unexplored divergent
effects of optimism, such that, optimism positively affects PBK’s impact on salesperson
performance, but weakens the relationship between CPBK and sales performance.
This departure from the putative positive impact of optimism makes a novel contribution to
the existing body of work on optimism (e.g. Dixon and Schertzer, 2005).
In the remainder of the paper, first, the conceptual framework is established, and then,
the hypotheses based on a synthesis of the literature are developed. Next, the methodology
and results of the empirical study are presented. The paper concludes with a discussion of
theoretical and managerial implications, limitations, and future research opportunities.

Theoretical background
KBV, salesperson product knowledge, and salesperson performance
Underscoring the importance of different dimensions of knowledge, KBV postulates that
sustainable competitive advantage is primarily a function of the firm’s ability to create, and
manage knowledge (Spender and Grant, 1996). Knowledge that contributes to a firm’s
competitive advantage is usually sticky, tacit, causally ambiguous, and deeply embedded in
organizational routines and practices. Much of the knowledge that firms possess is vested
with employees. The fundamental tenet of KBV is that a deep knowledge base can be an
 MIP inimitable source of competitive advantage (Nonaka, 1994; Spender and Grant, 1996).
35,6 Harnessing the accumulated tactical knowledge and tacit know-how, salespeople play a
vital role as firms seek to develop market-sensing and customer-linking capabilities.
For example, Menguc et al. (2013) demonstrate a positive association between sales
teams’ customer knowledge creation capability and salesperson performance.
Similarly, Rapp et al. (2014) describe salespeople as knowledge brokers, whose key task
726 is to acquire knowledge about their products and industry, and apply it to help solve
customers’ problems.
KBV of the firm, as a theoretical lens, is particularly useful for understanding determinants
of salesperson performance, which have been the object of long-standing research interest and
include individual characteristics such as salespeople’s knowledge and skills (e.g. Weitz et al.,
1986). Highly effective salespeople have been shown to provide more elaborate, contingent,
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

and distinctive scripts, compared to less effective sales colleagues; where, script has been
defined as organized knowledge describing an appropriate sequence of events or activities to
fit a particular situation (Leong et al., 1989). In light of its potential to inform research within
this sphere, this study leverages KBV to explicate a model involving PBK, CPBK, and
optimism as drivers of salesperson performance. This line of research has primarily focused
on salespeople’s declarative knowledge (a database for recognizing customer types, their
needs, and sales situations (Szymanski, 1988)) and procedural knowledge (a repertoire of
selling strategies to pursue (Matsuo and Kusumi, 2002; Weitz et al., 1986)).
A purpose of this research is to explicate the link between product knowledge and sales
performance by focusing on the level of salespeople’s PBK and CPBK. In contrast to a
majority of prior research that has emphasized the earlier described knowledge structures,
the focus of this research is on knowledge content. Table I places the current study in
context by documenting a broad overview of notable work on various knowledge themes
and definitions. Table II depicts how PBK and CPBK map onto the broad knowledge
typologies within the literature.

Salespeople’s product knowledge: PBK and CPBK

Product knowledge pertains to the extent to which a salesperson is knowledgeable about the
technical features and capabilities of the firm’s products as well as about customer use
situations (Homburg et al., 2008). Greater product knowledge elevates the potential for
understanding how well a product’s utility aligns with a customer’s needs and expectations,
and thus contributes to developing relationships (Steward et al., 2009).
Conceptualization of product knowledge in this research is aimed at advancing
existing knowledge content by revealing two facets of the product knowledge “black box”:
PBK and CPBK. This is in line with existing conceptualizations (see Prabhu et al., 2005;
Zhou and Li, 2012) of knowledge as both seller (internal) and competitor (external)
knowledge being key aspects of product knowledge. Acquisition of PBK can be perceived
as a sustained process of internal knowledge building based on a company’s own brands
and products. A high degree of PBK will go a long way toward utilizing the full value of a
product to satisfy consumers’ performance expectations. The content and structure
of PBK are readily accessible and capture the vertical dimension, knowledge depth, of
internal product knowledge. Knowledge about the full range of products and brands
enables salespeople to communicate the brand benefits and value (Baumgarth and
Schmidt, 2010). This research suggests that salespeople’s superior product knowledge
should lend confidence and proficiency in overcoming customers’ objections and thereby
closing a sale. In turn, when consumers’ perceived product risk is high and ability to
analyze information is low, they desire recommendations: a salesperson with a high
degree of product knowledge can increase consumer confidence in the purchase and
decrease a consumer’s information search cost.
 Key knowledge
Product
Authors construct Definition Sample/Context knowledge and
salesperson
Weitz et al. Knowledge Knowledge and information acquisition about Theoretical paper
(1986) domain categorization of customers and sales situations performance
Sujan et al. Knowledge Information about customer traits and strategies Student-caller in
(1988) structure to match their different ideal points university telephone
operation 727
Szymanski Declarative Schema-based knowledge about salespeople’s Theoretical paper
(1988) knowledge ability to identify customer types, needs, beliefs,
and values
Leong et al. Knowledge script Organized knowledge describing an appropriate Insurance
(1989) sequence of events or activities to fit a particular salespeople
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

situation
Nonaka (1994) Tacit vs explicit Tacit knowledge is unarticulated and tied to the Theoretical paper
knowledge senses, movement skills, physical experiences,
intuition, or implicit rule of thumb; explicit
knowledge is codified knowledge, uttered, and
captured in writing and drawings
Matsuo and Procedural Knowledge and skills about the methods or Salespeople in car
Kusumi (2002) knowledge strategies for specific sales situations dealership
Menon and Internal vs Knowledge gathered from inside the firm is Case study and
Pfeffer (2003) external internal knowledge; external knowledge is student sample
knowledge obtained from outside source
Prabhu et al. Technical Scientific knowledge applied to different Pharmaceutical firms
(2005) knowledge contexts and fields
De Luca and Market Firm’s knowledge of its customers’ behavior and Key informant in
Atuahene- knowledge needs as well as its competitors’ behavior high technology firm
Gima (2007) dimension
Sharma et al. Declarative and Knowledge about different customer attributes Retail salespeople of
(2007) Procedural such as behaviors and appearances is declarative department store
knowledge knowledge; unique sales strategies for different chain
customer group is procedural knowledge
Homburg et al. Market Market knowledge includes knowledge about Sales and marketing
(2008) knowledge and customers and competitors; product knowledge personnel of seven
product pertains to knowledge of products and internal industries
knowledge processes
Zhou and Li Knowledge base: Knowledge breadth is the extent to which firm’s Key informants in
(2012) breadth vs depth knowledge repository contains distinct and multiple high technology
domains; knowledge depth refers to the level of firms
complexity associated with knowledge in key field
Mariadoss Product An individual-level knowledge and captures Salesforce of a
et al. (2014) knowledge usage, technical developments, applications and medical device
treatments of the company’s product offering company
Leigh et al. Contingent The causal if-then expectation that is embedded Insurance agents
(2014) procedural in memory facilitating adaptive responses as the Table I.
knowledge sales call persuasive dialog unfolds Overview of existing
This paper Product Salespeople’s knowledge about the own products Automobile knowledge
knowledge (PBK) and competitors’ products (CPBK) salespeople conceptualization

Taxonomy PBK CPBK

Internal vs external Internal External Table II.

Depth vs breadth Depth Breadth How PBK and CPBK
Tacit vs explicit Explicit Explicit relates to exiting
Declarative vs procedural Declarative Declarative knowledge taxonomy
 MIP Conversely, CPBK, which can be defined as salespeople’s structured assessment of
35,6 competitors’ offerings, must be pursued from an external source, and encompasses the
horizontal dimension, knowledge breadth, of external product knowledge. Increasingly
complex and dynamic selling environments and strong competitor orientation may
necessitate obtaining CPBK. In the literature, however, this type of knowledge is often
subsumed under the broader concept of market knowledge (De Luca and Atuahene-Gima,
728 2007). From a customer perspective, in addition to knowing that they are getting the best
deal the store has to offer, increasingly, customers also look for reassurance that it is the
best deal in the market, which can only be provided if the salesperson possesses knowledge
about competitors’ products. CPBK enables salespersons to focus on and highlight the most
salient features of their own products, differentiate them from competitive products in terms
of features or price, and thus adapt to customer needs and obtain a favorable response
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

(Baumgarth and Schmidt, 2010).

In sum, by leveraging PBK and CPBK, salespeople can have a better grasp of how their
own brands are positioned relative to competing alternatives, and craft effective solutions to
match customer needs, which in turn result in favorable firm-level outcomes. Thus:
H1. PBK is positively associated with salesperson performance.
H2. CPBK is positively associated with salesperson performance.
Based on H1 and H2, this research postulates that PBK and CPBK make complementary
contributions to salesperson performance. Past research has not explicitly examined this
joint effect; the first two-way interaction hypothesis presented here fills that gap.
A repertoire of both PBK and CPBK will allow a salesperson to comprehend how a product
may satisfy customer needs, or if a product does not perform as expected or as well as
competing products do; and thereby, identify sales opportunities, foster superior customer
value, and build mutually satisfactory relationships. Furthermore, a salesperson who rates
high on both PBK and CPBK would be better able to reconcile contradictory information.
Based on this, it is reasonable to expect that PBK and CPBK, jointly, will facilitate positive
sales outcomes.
Extant research offers views consistent with this line of thinking. For example,
Prabhu et al. (2005) make a compelling argument that internal knowledge (i.e. PBK) can
predict how well firms can utilize external knowledge (i.e. CPBK). Presence of both
knowledge bases enables harvesting of external knowledge and its assimilation with
internal knowledge to the firm’s advantage (Zahra and George, 2002). In a recent research,
Mariadoss et al. (2014) document that superior product knowledge enables salespeople to
effectively utilize relevant competitive intelligence. The preceding arguments suggest a
positive synergy between PBK and CPBK. Accordingly, it is hypothesized that:
H3. The combined effect (i.e. interactive effect) of salespersons’ PBK and CPBK is
positively associated with salesperson performance.

Role of optimism and salesperson product knowledge

Optimism can be viewed as one’s preconceived notion toward holding best potential outcomes
regardless of circumstances (Schulman, 1999). Personality research in psychology has
documented that an individual’s level of optimism plays a role in how that individual responds
to challenging situations and setbacks (Scheier and Carver, 1985). Evidence from a recent
survey reveals that approximately 50 percent salespeople fail to meet sales quotas, suggesting
that failure and a sense of rejection are common in the sales profession (Ahearne et al., 2013).
Under this light, optimism helps salespeople interpret the causes of success and failure and
select subsequent behaviors (e.g. by rebounding quickly or persisting vs giving up).
For example, Seligman and Schulman (1986) investigate life insurance sales agents of
 two firms and find that optimists are half as likely to quit in a year as pessimists, and sell Product
nearly 60 percent more in their first two years. knowledge and
This research proposes that the association between salespeople’s product knowledge salesperson
and performance is contingent on their level of optimism. Specifically, predicated
on two bases of causal attribution, locus of causality (internal vs external) and stability performance
of the cause (stable vs unstable) (Weiner, 1985), and the difference between internal
vs external knowledge bases (Prabhu et al., 2005), optimism is expected to influence the 729
relationship between the two knowledge descriptors and performance in directionally
opposite ways.
Leaning on attribution theory (DeCarlo et al., 1997; Dixon et al., 2001; Mayo and Mallin,
2010), whose distinctive feature is to provide insights into how individual differences might
play a role in the linkage between attributions for failure and subsequent behavioral choices
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

of individuals, this research further explores the process involving optimism, salespeople’s
product knowledge (i.e. PBK vs CPBK), and salesperson performance. Optimistic
salespeople view failure as a minor or temporary setback and attribute it to an unstable
rather than a stable cause (Seligman and Schulman, 1986). Consequently, they employ
more problem-focused coping tactics (Strutton and Lumpkin, 1993). In similar vein, this
research postulates that optimistic salespeople tend to be self-motivated, prefer to get
started on a task and stay positive about the outcome. They have positive attitudes about
internal knowledge readily available to them and are more likely to place a premium on it.
PBK will provide a more stable internal context for optimistic salespeople to overcome
obstacles and setbacks, and to develop alternate pathways toward future success.
Hence, compared to pessimistic salespeople, optimistic salespeople are more likely to persist
and utilize their PBK. Optimism is, therefore, expected to augment the positive effect of PBK
on sales performance.
Conversely, less optimistic salespeople have a tendency to ascribe reasons for failure to
stable factors (Seligman and Schulman, 1986) and employ more emotion-focused coping
tactics (Strutton and Lumpkin, 1993). Weiner (1986) asserts that salespeople view most
external causes as uncontrollable, and accordingly believe that they have little or no control
over obtaining external knowledge, such as CPBK. There is evidence that legal and
technological barriers often thwart easy access to competitor knowledge (Menon and
Pfeffer, 2003). The current research contends that optimistic salespeople are expected to
associate external attributions with CPBK. For them, greater the optimism, the less they
depend on CPBK. This may be in part because acquiring external knowledge warrants
greater expenditure of time, effort, and financial resources, with disproportionate benefits
being perceived, whereby, optimistic salespeople will be less committed to affirm CPBK’s
value. Consequently, high optimism will suppress the supportive effect of CPBK on
salesperson performance. Correspondingly, when optimism is low, performance, or lack
thereof, may be attributed to external factors, such as competition. For salespeople low in
optimism, first, CPBK becomes a sales tool and greater performance benefit is perceived
from acquiring it, and second, they amass knowledge about competition because they fear
being competed out of the marketplace. This is consistent with the notion that pessimists
are more preoccupied with external threats (Segerstrom, 2001). Such an argument leads to
the view that salespeople with low optimism are more likely to utilize CPBK. Based on the
preceding discussion, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H4. Optimism moderates the relationship between PBK and salesperson performance
such that the relationship strengthens when optimism is higher compared to when
it is lower.
H5. Optimism moderates the relationship between CPBK and salesperson performance such
that the relationship weakens when optimism is higher compared to when it is lower.
 MIP Figure 1 is a graphic representation of the model and proposed hypotheses.
35,6
Empirical study
Sample and data collection
An individual automobile salesperson is the unit of analysis in this study. For several
reasons, the automotive industry is particularly salient as the empirical context here. First,
730 salespeople are primarily responsible for clearly presenting product information and
responding to customer questions. Second, due to the sheer number of available options,
coupled with the category being high involvement, salespeople have a role facilitating
customers’ purchase decisions in this industry. Third, some newer cars have features too
complex for customers to comprehend and yet, salespeople may not need extensive training
to acquire the requisite product knowledge. Direct interactions with customers require
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

salespeople to possess PBK and CPBK. There is potential variance in product knowledge
from one salesperson to another and thus, it provides a ripe context for this research.
The sample was drawn from 27 different automobile dealerships located in four cities/
towns within 100 miles of each other in Southern USA. As part of a research project, students
of a marketing research class at a regional university handed out cover letters, along with
questionnaires and an envelope to salespeople at dealerships in adjacent towns and then
retrieved completed questionnaires after three weeks. Even though the dealerships’ general
managers were contacted to introduce the study and encourage participation, note that
completed questionnaires were retrieved in sealed envelopes. Respondents were aware that
their responses would be treated confidentially. The data collection efforts yielded a total of
193 questionnaires out of which 185 were usable, for a 61.6 percent response rate (185 out of
300). Dealerships included in the study sell various brands in the same product class at
comparable price ranges. To ensure integrity of the data received, telephone calls were made
by one of the authors to 10 percent randomly selected respondents to confirm that students
had followed proper data collection procedures. All questionnaires were picked up at the same
time. Next, respondents were randomly divided into two parts and t-tests run to compare
means. The sample was split two different ways and both comparisons indicated that no
significant differences existed between the two groups ( pW0.10). Thus, there was no evidence
of potential nonresponse bias (Armstrong and Overton, 1977). The average age of respondents

Optimism
Depth:
Product and
Brand
Knowledge H1
(PBK)
H4

Salesperson
PBK × CPBK Performance
H3

H5
Breadth:
Competitors’
Figure 1. Product and H2
Hypothesized Brand
relationships between Knowledge
(CPBK)
product knowledge,
optimism, and Product
performance Knowledge
 was 41.25 years (SD ¼ 6.52), ranging between 36 and 45 years; 90 percent were males with a Product
mean of 8.14 years of sales experience (SD ¼ 7.9). knowledge and
Survey development
salesperson
For optimism and sales performance, well-established scales were adapted and new ones performance
were developed for PBK and CPBK, adhering to the procedure recommended by Churchill
(1979). Beginning with a review of pertinent literature and exploratory qualitative 731
grounding; in-depth interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of four industry
sales representatives (not part of survey) to ensure face validity of measures. Scales were
fine-tuned based on these responses and follow-up interviews. Measure items along with
their loadings and reliabilities are presented under measure validation in Table III.
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

Measurement of constructs
PBK and CPBK. Measures for PBK and CPBK were developed for this study, and both
comprised four items based on a seven-point semantic differential scale. Sample item for
PBK: “Knowledge about vehicles compared to an average car salesperson.” Sample item for
CPBK: “Knowledge about latest features offered by competitors.” One item (“Knowledge
about competitor brands”) was taken from Rentz et al. (2002). Cronbach’s α for both PBK
and CPBK was 0.91.

Factor loadings

PBK (product and brand knowledge) (newly developed scale: α ¼ 0.91) a

1. Knowledge about vehicles compared to average car salesperson 0.78 0.31 0.18 0.13
2. Knowledge about vehicles compared to your colleagues’ knowledge 0.82 0.31 0.11 0.22
3. Knowledge about your specific brand compared to your colleagues’ knowledge 0.85 0.24 0.18 0.12
4. Technical knowledge about features of your brand compared to your
colleagues’ knowledge 0.65 0.16 0.35 0.03
CPBK (competitors’ product and brand knowledge) (newly developed scale: α ¼ 0.91)a
1. Knowledge about competitor brands (Rentz et al., 2002) 0.21 0.61 0.43 0.12
2. Knowledge about latest features offered by competitors 0.19 0.69 0.42 0.23
3. Knowledge about competitors’ prices 0.37 0.83 0.22 10
4. Knowledge about competitors’ rebate offers 0.40 0.83 0.07 0.11
Optimism (adapted from Scheier and Carver, 1985: α ¼ 0.80)b
1. In uncertain times, I usually expect the best 0.26 0.03 0.78 0.17
2. I always look on the bright side of things 0.25 0.27 0.82 −0.07
3. I’m always optimistic about the future 0.20 0.20 0.78 0.03
4. I always look at every experience as a learning opportunity (new item) 0.06  0.04 0.65 0.27
Sales performance (adapted from Behrman and Perreault, 1982: α ¼ 0.93)c
1. At contributing to my dealerships acquisition of market share 0.35 0.14 0.12 0.80
2. At selling high profit margin products 0.46 0.27 0.00 0.67
3. At generating a high volume of sales dollars 0.46 0.24 0.07 0.81
4. At quickly generating sales of new additions to my dealerships inventory 0.13 0.24 0.18 0.77
5. At correctly identifying prospects 0.05 0.30 0.24 0.69
6. At converting prospects to customers (Newly developed scale) 0.19 0.21 0.31 0.75
7. At exceeding sales targets 0.20 0.15 0.12 0.82
8. At assisting the sales manager at achieving his or her goals 0.30 0.16 0.09 0.81
Eigen-values 5.33 3.78 2.74 2.61
Communalities 26.6 18.9 13.7 13.1
Notes: aSeven-point semantic differential scale ranging from “least knowledgeable” (1) to “most knowledgeable” (7); Table III.
b
seven-point Likert scale anchored by “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (7); cseven-point semantic Measures, sources,
differential scale ranging from “much worse” (1) to “much better” (7). Loadings greater than 0.50 appear in italic for loadings, and
visual clarity reliabilities
 MIP Optimism. Scheier and Carver’s (1985) life orientation test (LOT) scale ( four items), which has
35,6 been extensively used in the prior research was adapted to measure optimism. LOT measures
dispositional optimism as global expectations about the future being positive or negative. Sample
item: “In uncertain times, I usually expect the best.” Cronbach’s α for the four items was 0.80.
Sales performance. A seven-item self-reported performance scale developed by Behrman
and Perreault (1982) was used to measure sales performance. The scale items reflect
732 salespeople’s evaluation of themselves with respect to achievement of sales objectives on a
scale of worse than most (1) to better than most (7). Adaptations were made to capture the
automobile sales context. One item, “Converting prospect to customer” was added. Sample
item: “At contributing to my dealerships acquisition of market share.” Cronbach’s α was 0.93.
Table IV shows descriptive statistics and a correlation matrix for the variables of interest.
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

Analyses and results

Measure validation
Measures were validated by first examining item-to-total correlations and submitting them
to an exploratory factor analysis (EFA), which resulted in factor solutions as theoretically
expected. Overall, each of the four multi-item reflective scales exhibited acceptable
psychometric properties: Cronbach’s α surpassed the recommended thresholds of 0.70
(Nunnally, 1978). Next, all scale items were subjected to principal component analysis with a
varimax rotation. A clean factor structure emerged; as Table III shows, all items have
substantial loadings on their intended factors and not on other factors, thereby confirming
convergent and discriminant validities, respectively.
When both dependent and independent measures stem from the same respondents with
the same questionnaire format, potential for common method bias (CMB) exists. Several steps
were taken in developing the instrument to prevent CMB (Podsakoff et al., 2003). First, in the
consent letter, respondents were offered anonymity and confidentiality to reduce socially
desirable responses. Second, following Rindfleisch et al. (2008) suggestions, a combination of
semantic differential and Likert scales were used. Third, a pretest prevented ambiguity in the
scale items. Fourth, the criterion variable did not precede predictor variables on the
instrument. Fifth, post hoc EFA on all items yielded a four-factor solution accounting for 72.26
of the total variance with each factor having an eigenvalue greater than 1. The factor which
made the largest contribution to variance in the model, sales performance (variance
explained ¼ 26.6 percent), accounted for less than half the sum total of the variance explained
by all four factors (Menon et al., 1999, p. 31). Lastly, the Lindell and Whitney (2001) method
was used to check for CMB as follows: bivariate correlations among the model constructs were
generated with an additional marker variable, spouse support, which is theoretically unrelated
to modeled antecedents. Spouse support was measured by three items: my spouse/partner
goes out of his/her way to support me, I can freely express my inner thoughts to my spouse/
partner, and I talk about my work issues with my spouse/partner; Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.73.
The lowest positive correlation was 0.045 between spouse support and optimism. Previously
significant correlations in the unadjusted matrix remained significant at the 0.05 or 0.01 levels
after partialling out the effect of the MV correlation, suggesting absence of CMB.

Variables Mean (SD) 1 2 3 4

1. Sales performance 5.60 (0.86) 1

2. Optimism 6.05 (0.80) 0.42** 1
Table IV. 3. PBK 5.53 (1.03) 0.47** 0.23** 1
Correlation matrix and 4. CPBK 4.63 (1.19) 0.60** 0.33** 0.57** 1
descriptive statistics Note: **po 0.01 (two-tailed)
 Approach to analysis Product
As a first step, age, and experience were introduced into the regression model as potential knowledge and
covariates. Next, salesperson performance was regressed on PBK, CPBK, optimism, and salesperson
interactions between PBK and CPBK, optimism and PBK, optimism and CPBK, which had
previously been mean centered to avoid multicollinearity, as specified in the equation below: performance
Salesperson performance ¼ b0 þb1 Ageþb2 Experienceþb3 PBK þb4 CPBK
733
þb5 PBK  CPBK þb6 Optimismþb7 PBK  Optimism
þb8 CPBK  Optimism (1)

Hypotheses testing
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

Table V displays unstandardized estimates of the multiple regression model. Column 3

indicates the statistics for the main-effects-only model, and the statistics for the full model
with interactions are in column 4. Table V also reports the overall significance of the
additional interaction effect reported in the full model (change in F and the associated
change in R2). The full model has a good fit with F (6,185) ¼ 21.2, p o0.01 and explains 49.2
percent of the variance in sales performance. A significant F change indicates that the full
model with interactions demonstrates a better fit and significantly more explanatory power
than the main-effects-only model does. Because no variance inflation factor was larger than
the conventional threshold of 10, multicollinearity among predictors was not a threat to
interpretation of results.

Main effects
The two hypothesized main effects, in support of H1 and H2, were significant at the 0.05 and
0.01 levels, respectively. According to H1, PBK was a positive predictor of sales performance
(b3 ¼ 0.12, po0.05). Confirming H2, CPBK had a significant positive effect on sales
performance (b4 ¼ 0.30, po0.01). The impact of age and experience was not significant.

Moderating effects
H3 proposed a positive interaction between the two knowledge domains (PBK and CPBK).
Confirming this prediction, the interaction between PBK and CPBK was significant and
positive (b5 ¼ 0.08, po0.05). Thus, H3 received support. To further explicate the interaction, a

Independent variables Hypothesis Main effect – only model Main + interaction effects model

Age Control −0.08 (−1.77) −0.07 (−1.57)

Experience Control −0.009 (−1.32) −0.013 (−1.88)
PBK H1 0.13** (2.35) 0.11 (1.94)
CPBK H2 0.30*** (6.00) 0.29*** (5.85)
Optimism 0.23*** (3.71) 0.26*** (4.06)
PBK × CPBK H3 −0.08** (−2.05)
PBK × optimism H4 −0.028 (−0.43)
CPBK × optimism H5 −0.14** (−2.35)
2
R 0.465 0.492
Adj. R2 0.45 0.469
F-value of the model 30.89*** 21.19***
F change 3.26**
Notes: n ¼ 185. PBK, product and brand knowledge; CPBK, competitors’ product & brand knowledge. Table V.
For each variable, the reported values are unstandardized beta with corresponding t-values in parentheses. Moderated multiple
Two-tailed significance tests. **p o 0.05; ***p o 0.01 regression results
 MIP simple slopes analysis was conducted following Cohen et al.’s (2003) recommendation. In the
35,6 visual depiction (Figure 2), PBK is on the horizontal axis and sales performance on the vertical
axis. The two lines were positioned on the graph to demonstrate how the slope changes at
differing levels of CPBK. The slope of PBK was positively steep for salespeople with high
CPBK, underscoring that the relationship between PBK and performance is strongest for
those with high CPBK. Figure 2 illustrates this relationship and provides support for H3.
734 In H4, PBK was hypothesized to positively interact with optimism to improve sales
performance. Results showed no evidence of a moderating influence of optimism on the
relationship between PBK and salesperson performance as PBK × optimism interaction
was not significant (b7 ¼ −0.00, ns). Thus, H4 was not supported. H5 expected the
relationship between CPBK and salesperson performance to be negatively moderated by
optimism. In support of this hypothesis, the empirical results revealed a significant
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

negative optimism × CPBK interaction (b8 ¼ −0.13, p o 0.05). As before, the interaction
was further explicated using the simple slopes method (see Figure 3). The slope for CPBK
was positive for salespeople with low optimism and negative for salespeople with high
optimism. This indicates a significant negative effect of CPBK on sales performance when

2.5

1.5
Sales Performance

1
High CPBK
0.5 Low CPBK

–0.5
Figure 2. –1
PBK × CPBK
interaction –1.5
PBK

1
Sales Performance

High optimism
–1
Low optimism

–2
Figure 3.
Optimism × CPBK
interaction –3
CPBK
 optimism was high. In contrast, when optimism was low, the relationship between CPBK Product
and sales performance was positive. Thus, low optimism strengthens the relationship knowledge and
between CPBK and sales performance, fully in line with H5. salesperson
performance
Discussion
The contingent framework advanced in this paper offers a deeper understanding of factors
that influence salesperson performance. Specifically, this research theorized and empirically 735
examined: the main effect of two product knowledge descriptors, PBK and CPBK; the
interaction effect of PBK × CPBK; and finally, the divergence of the contingent effect of
salesperson’ optimism on the relationship between the two knowledge domains and
performance. All hypotheses were supported except H4 about PBK × optimism interaction.
To examine robustness of results, some additional analyses were conducted. Post hoc, the
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

negative effect of optimism between those who had more than six years of experience as
automobile salespeople (where six years was the median experience in the sample) vs those
who had less than or equal to six years of experience was compared. Results of the analysis,
as presented in Table VI, show that the negative effect of optimism on the CPBK-
performance relationship occurs only among salespeople with ⩽ six years of experience;
b ¼ −0.18, p o0.05. Among those with more than six years of experience, optimism
did have an attenuating effect, but the relationship between CPBK and performance became
insignificant; b ¼ −0.04, ns.

Implications for theory

While there is consensus that salespeople’s skills and knowledge are critical drivers of
performance, to the best of our knowledge, past research has not explicitly examined
salespeople’s knowledge as it pertains to their own and competitors’ products. By
theoretically and empirically disentangling PBK and CPBK, this study enriches theoretical
understanding of the multi-dimensional nature of salespeople’s product knowledge and its
complex ramifications, and highlights the need to consider modeling the effects of the two
product knowledge descriptors separately. Modeling of synergistic effects of PBK and
CPBK is novel and provides evidence that the largest effect occurs when they operate
jointly. Thus, examination of PBK or CPBK in isolation may lead to an underestimation of
the influence of either form of product knowledge on sales performance.
Further, this study integrates long-standing research on the linkages between
salespeople’s own causal attributions and subsequent behaviors to paint a portrait of the
role of optimism that is markedly different from a traditional one. Challenging conventional

Independent variables Hypothesis Experience ⩽ 6 years ExperienceW6 years

PBK H1 0.21** (2.26) 0.07 (0.98)

CPBK H2 0.28*** (−3.97) 0.22*** (3.08)
Optimism 0.26*** (3.04) 0.29*** (2.74)
PBK × CPBK H3 0.14*** (2.67) −0.05 (−0.85)
PBK × optimism H4 −0.11 (−1.16) −0.01 (−0.12)
CPBK × optimism H5 −0.18** (−2.46) −0.04 (−0.32)
R2 0.562 0.325
2
Adj. R 0.534 0.273
F-value of the model 19.89*** 6.19***
Table VI.
F difference 3.21 Moderated multiple
Notes: n ¼ 185. PBK, product and brand knowledge; CPBK, competitors’ product and brand knowledge. regression results for
For each variable, the reported values are unstandardized beta with corresponding t-values in parentheses. high vs low
Two-tailed significance tests. **p o 0.05; ***p o 0.01 experience
 MIP wisdom, it demonstrates a condition wherein optimism’s impact on performance could be
35,6 negative, suggesting that with respect to driving sales performance, optimism or CPBK
alone, provide only a partial picture. This finding is important because very few empirical
studies have documented a negative impact of optimism on performance.
Lack of significance for the PBK × optimism to salesperson performance relationship is
provocative and worthy of further study. Are there settings or conditions when this
736 moderating effect might be supported? One speculative explanation is that deep PBK may
provide salespeople with a superior processing approach that is both functional and logical;
thus, they develop a high level of confidence, and as a result, are not influenced by
motivational and emotional benefits that optimism usually confers. More research into this
area could advance understanding of this relationship.
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

Implications for practice

In addition to contributions to research, this study provides sales managers with actionable
implications to improve their decisions. Managers might consider adopting a nuanced view
of salespeople’s product knowledge and its performance-enhancing role. More importantly,
by disaggregating salespeople’s product knowledge into PBK and CPBK, this approach
lends itself to more precise insights into decisions about employee knowledge development.
Based on the findings, there is a need for firms to consciously balance their resource
investments to develop PBK and CPBK, to take advantage of the potential synergy. It can be
argued that salespeople’s level of product knowledge is amenable to changes. As such, by
evaluating salespeople’s level of product knowledge, sales managers or trainers might be
able to identify areas that warrant improvements, rather than using standardized “one size
fits all” development programs.
This research also provides managers with a nuanced understanding of the relationship
between salespeople’s product knowledge and optimism. By illuminating the contingent
effect of optimism on two product knowledge descriptors, these findings demonstrate that
the relationship between salespeople’s product knowledge and performance is not straight-
forward. A salient finding emanating from this research is how optimism triggers a complex
set of attributions and plays a role in the link between product knowledge and performance.
These findings are more prescriptive and action oriented at the level of the sales manager
and illustrate how context shapes dominance of one knowledge descriptor over another.
Sales managers should bear in mind that even though both PBK and optimism are
positively associated with performance, when investigated in conjunction, there was no
interaction. It informs sales managers that sometimes salespeople’s valued internal
resources, such as PBK and optimism, may not influence each other; instead, access to stores
of external resources in varied forms of organizational support may be required (Stan et al.,
2012). It appears that salespeople with high PBK are intrinsically driven and different
strategies may be required to motivate them. Results of this research show that firms might
do well to consider these idiosyncrasies.
Also of particular interest is the observed negative interaction between CPBK and optimism
that runs contrary to the putative viewpoint about optimism. This knowledge is of extreme
importance as it reshapes practicing managers’ mind-sets and provides a cautionary tale by
exposing the dysfunctional impact of optimism. This may impel sales managers to do
something very different from what they might otherwise have done. In addition, this finding
informs managers that they might try to buffer the potential negative impact of optimism.
Appropriate control mechanisms could be employed to better understand how salespeople’s
attributions are made within particular selling environments. However, building such shared
understanding through social strategies will be a long-term and costly process. This subscribes
to prior research that attribution could be enhanced and nurtured (Schulman, 1999) and
dysfunctional attributions could be replaced with functional attributions.
 Limitations and future research considerations Product
This study is subject to several limitations, which may open up fruitful avenues for future knowledge and
studies to consider. Since the research design was based on perceptual data from a single salesperson
informant source, there is potential for social desirability bias. In particular, self-reported
knowledge and performance levels could be exaggerated. Although Singh (2000) asserts performance
that these biases are significantly reduced by curbing the motivation of self-presentation
(as approached in this research) and that this limitation applies to much empirical sales 737
research, objective measures are desirable. Further, Chonko et al. (2000) suggest that if the
context is clarified in detail, i.e., “the nature of the job being examined” as detailed in this
manuscript, readers can draw their own conclusions about generalizability of findings.
Cross-sectional data, as in this research, cannot capture temporal dynamics and the
underlying process explanation, thereby limiting cause/effect inferences. Use of longitudinal
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

data is warranted here. While the controlled extraneous variations afford a cleaner
environment to examine the focal effects, a sample from one industry restricts generalizability
of results. Replication on other types of selling situations would allow researchers to assess
boundary conditions for the ideas presented in this work. Finally, a useful issue for future
research lies in refining two newly conceptualized product knowledge descriptors (i.e. PBK
and CPBK), which warrant further conceptual developments.

References
Ahearne, M., Boichuk, J.P., Chapman, C.J. and Steenburgh, T.J. (2013), “Earnings management practices
in sales and strategic accounts survey report”, Working Paper No. 2324325, Darden Business
School, Charlottesville, available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2324325; http://dx.doi.org/10.2
139/ssrn.2324325 (accessed April 12, 2017).
Armstrong, J.S. and Overton, T.S. (1977), “Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 396-402.
Baumgarth, C. and Schmidt, M. (2010), “How strong is the business-to-business brand in the workforce?
An empirically-tested model of ‘internal brand equity’ in a business-to-business setting”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 39 No. 8, pp. 1250-1260.
Behrman, D.N. and Perreault, W.D. Jr (1982), “Measuring the performance of industrial salespersons”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 355-370.
Boichuk, J.P., Bolander, W., Hall, Z.R., Ahearne, M., Zahn, W.J. and Nieves, M. (2014), “Learned
helplessness among newly hired salespeople and the influence of leadership”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 78 No. 1, pp. 95-111.
Chonko, L.B., Loe, T.N., Roberts, J.A. and Tanner, J.F. (2000), “Sales performance: timing of
measurement and type of measurement make a difference”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales
Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 23-36.
Churchill, G.A. Jr (1979), “A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs”, Journal
of Marketing Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 64-73.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G. and Aiken, L.S. (2003), Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis
for the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd ed., Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
De Luca, L.M. and Atuahene-Gima, K. (2007), “Market knowledge dimensions and cross-functional
collaboration: examining the different routes to product innovation performance”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 71 No. 1, pp. 95-112.
DeCarlo, T.E., Teas, R.K. and McElroy, J.C. (1997), “Salesperson performance attribution processes and
the formation of expectancy estimates”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 17
No. 3, pp. 1-17.
Dixon, A.L. and Schertzer, S.M.B. (2005), “Bouncing back: how salesperson optimism and self-efficacy
influence attributions and behaviors following failure”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales
Management, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 361-369.
 MIP Dixon, A.L., Spiro, R.L. and Jamil, M. (2001), “Successful and unsuccessful sales calls: measuring
35,6 salesperson attributions and behavioral intentions”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65 No. 3,
pp. 64-78.
Homburg, C., Jensen, O. and Krohmer, H. (2008), “Configurations of marketing and sales: a taxonomy”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 72 No. 2, pp. 133-154.
Leigh, T.W., DeCarlo, T.E., Allbright, D. and Lollar, J. (2014), “Salesperson knowledge distinctions and
738 sales performance”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 123-140.
Leong, S.M., Busch, P.S. and John, D.R. (1989), “Knowledge bases and salesperson effectiveness: a
script-theoretic analysis”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 164-178.
Lindell, M.K. and Whitney, D.J. (2001), “Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional
research designs”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 1, pp. 114-121.
Madhavaram, S. and McDonald, R.E. (2010), “Knowledge-based sales management strategy and the
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

grafting metaphor: implications for theory and practice”, Industrial Marketing Management,
Vol. 39 No. 7, pp. 1078-1087.
Mariadoss, B.J., Milewicz, C., Lee, S. and Sahaym, A. (2014), “Salesperson competitive intelligence and
performance: the role of product knowledge and sales force automation usage”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 136-145.
Matsuo, M. and Kusumi, T. (2002), “Salesperson’s procedural knowledge, experience and performance:
an empirical study in Japan”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36 Nos 7/8, pp. 840-854.
Mayo, M. and Mallin, M.L. (2010), “The impact of sales failure on attributions made by ‘resource-
challenged’ and ‘resource-secure’ salespeople”, Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, Vol. 18
No. 3, pp. 233-247.
Menguc, B., Auh, S. and Uslu, A. (2013), “Customer knowledge creation capability and performance in
sales teams”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 19-39.
Menon, A., Bharadwaj, S.G., Adidam, P.T. and Edison, S.W. (1999), “Antecedents and consequences of
marketing strategy making: a model and a test”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 18-40.
Menon, T. and Pfeffer, J. (2003), “Valuing internal vs. external knowledge: explaining the preference for
outsiders”, Management Science, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 497-513.
Nonaka, I. (1994), “A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation”, Organization Science,
Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 14-37.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Prabhu, J.C., Chandy, R.K. and Ellis, M.E. (2005), “The impact of acquisitions on innovation: poison pill,
placebo, or tonic?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 114-130.
Rapp, A., Bachrach, D.G., Panagopoulos, N. and Ogilvie, J. (2014), “Salespeople as knowledge brokers:
a review and critique of the challenger sales model”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales
Management, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 245-259.
Rentz, J.O., Shepherd, C.D., Tashchian, A., Dabholkar, P.A. and Ladd, R.T. (2002), “A measure of selling
skill: scale development and validation”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 22
No. 1, pp. 13-21.
Rindfleisch, A., Malter, A.J., Ganesan, S. and Moorman, C. (2008), “Cross-sectional versus longitudinal
survey research: concepts, findings, and guidelines”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 45
No. 3, pp. 261-279.
Scheier, M.F. and Carver, C.S. (1985), “Optimism, coping, and health: assessment and implications of
generalized outcome expectancies”, Health Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 219-247.
Schulman, P. (1999), “Applying learned optimism to increase sales productivity”, Journal of Personal
Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 31-37.
 Segerstrom, S.C. (2001), “Optimism, goal conflict, and stressor-related immune change”, Journal of Product
Behavioral Medicine, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 441-467. knowledge and
Seligman, M.E. and Schulman, P. (1986), “Explanatory style as a predictor of productivity and quitting salesperson
among life insurance sales agents”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 50 No. 4,
pp. 832-838. performance
Sharma, A., Levy, M. and Evanschitzky, H. (2007), “The variance in sales performance explained by the
knowledge structures of salespeople”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 27
No. 2, pp. 169-181.
739
Sheth, J.N. and Sharma, A. (2008), “The impact of the product to service shift in industrial markets and
the evolution of the sales organization”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 37 No. 3,
pp. 260-269.
Singh, J. (2000), “Performance productivity and quality of frontline employees in service organizations”,
Downloaded by Emerald Institution, Claudia Knight At 03:58 04 October 2017 (PT)

Journal of Marketing, Vol. 64 No. 2, pp. 15-34.

Spender, J.C. and Grant, R.M. (1996), “Knowledge and the firm: overview”, Strategic Management
Journal, Vol. 17 No. S2, pp. 5-9.
Stan, S., Evans, K.R., Arnold, T.J. and McAmis, G.T. (2012), “The moderating influence of
organizational support on the development of salesperson job performance: can an organization
provide too much support?”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 32 No. 4,
pp. 405-420.
Steward, M.D., Hutt, M.D., Walker, B.A. and Kumar, A. (2009), “Role identity and attributions of high-
performing salespeople”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 7, pp. 463-473.
Strutton, D. and Lumpkin, J.T. (1993), “The relationship between optimism and coping styles of
salespeople”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 71-82.
Sujan, H., Sujan, M. and Bettman, J.R. (1988), “Knowledge structure differences between more effective
and less effective salespeople”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 81-86.
Szymanski, D.M. (1988), “Determinants of selling effectiveness: the importance of declarative
knowledge to the personal selling concept”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 64-77.
Weiner, B. (1985), Human Motivation, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.
Weiner, B. (1986), “An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion”, in Weiner, B. (Ed.),
An Attributional Theory of Motivation and Emotion, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 159-190.
Weitz, B.A., Sujan, H. and Sujan, M. (1986), “Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behavior: a
framework for improving selling effectiveness”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 174-191.
Zahra, S.A. and George, G. (2002), “Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization, and extension”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 185-203.
Zhou, K.Z. and Li, C.B. (2012), “How knowledge affects radical innovation: knowledge base, market
knowledge acquisition, and internal knowledge sharing”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 33
No. 9, pp. 1090-1102.

Corresponding author
Feisal Murshed can be contacted at: murshed@kutztown.edu

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats