This article was downloaded by: [The Aga Khan University]On: 09 October 2014, At: 19:50Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Personal Selling & Sales ManagementPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpss20

An Update on the Status of Sales Management TrainingThomas L. Powers, Thomas E. DeCarlo & Gouri GuptePublished online: 23 Sep 2013.

To cite this article: Thomas L. Powers, Thomas E. DeCarlo & Gouri Gupte (2010) An Update on the Status of SalesManagement Training, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 30:4, 319-326

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/PSS0885-3134300402

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, vol. XXX, no. 4 (fall 2010), pp. 319–326.© 2010 PSE National Educational Foundation. All rights reserved.

ISSN 0885-3134 / 2010 $9.50 + 0.00. DOI 10.2753/PSS0885-3134300402

Recent trends in the personal selling environment, such as advances in technology, customer relationship management, and globalization, have placed a premium on training pro-grams designed to develop knowledgeable and effective sales managers (Deeter-Schmelz, Kennedy, and Goebel 2002; Jones et al. 2005; Magrath 1997; Marshall and Michaels 2001). Many firms have recognized that enhancing a sales manager’s working knowledge through training can be a source of a firm’s competitive advantage (Davenport and Prusak 1998). Indeed, there is evidence that employee intellectual capital constitutes up to 75 percent of a firm’s total balance sheet (Kust 2005). Given the increased focus on developing manager knowledge and recent advances in ways to deliver informa-tion over the past decade (e.g., technology), there is a need for understanding the current role and positioning of sales manager training (Ricks, Williams, and Weeks 2008). From a theoretical perspective, a study of current sales management training practices can also contribute to our understanding of the overall process of organizational learning (Hurley and Hult 1998). Thus, a survey to learn the status of sales management training programs would be useful for both researchers and practitioners (Anderson, Mehta, and Strong 1997).

Despite its strategic importance, the topic of sales man-agement training remains one of the most neglected areas in the personal selling and sales management literature. Related

topics such as sales manager effectiveness and sales training have been well researched, but there have been only four sales management training studies reported in the literature over the past 40 years, with the most recent publication over a de-cade ago (Adams 1965; Anderson, Mehta, and Strong 1997; Coppett and Staples 1980; Shepherd and Ridnour 1995). The relative absence of attention to sales manager training practices is surprising because training is considered one of the most pervasive methods for not only enhancing individual productivity but also communicating organizational goals to new personnel (Arthur et al. 2003). Given the consider-able amount of resources allocated to sales training (Wilson, Strutton, and Farris 2002), it is important to understand how those resources are being used.

The most recent study published in the Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management by Anderson, Mehta, and Strong (1997) provided an important contribution in terms of the content and delivery methods of sales management training. However, there have been significant economic, cultural, technological, and demographic changes that might have in-fluenced sales management training methods since that time. The present study, consisting of data from 132 practicing sales managers, provides a current state-of-the-art perspective on the status of sales management training.

ReseaRch Objective and MethOd

The objective of the present study is to report the status of sales management training in the following areas: (1) the availability and timing of sales management training, (2) the form and location of sales management training, (3) the specific methods used in training programs, (4) the type of instructor used, (5) the topics covered, and (6) the perceived importance, effec-tiveness, and satisfaction that sales managers have experienced with their training. We used Anderson, Mehta, and Strong’s (1997) survey instrument as the initial starting point for the present study. Using a three-phase process, modifications were

thomas L. Powers (Ph.D., Michigan State University), Professor of Marketing, Graduate School of Management, University of Alabama at Birmingham, tpowers@uab.edu.

thomas e. decarlo (Ph.D., University of Georgia), Professor and Ben S. Weil Endowed Chair of Industrial Distribution, Graduate School of Management, University of Alabama at Birmingham, tdecarlo@uab.edu.

Gouri Gupte (Ph.D., University of Alabama at Birmingham), Assistant Professor, School of Public Health, Boston University, gourig@bu.edu.

an UPdate On the statUs Of saLes ManaGeMent tRaininG

thomas L. Powers, thomas e. decarlo, and Gouri Gupte

Over the past several years, there have been significant changes that have affected the sales function and the needed competencies of sales managers. Unfortunately, there has been no recent research investigating the status of sales manage-ment training practices. The purpose of the present study is to investigate current practices of sales management training programs in terms of delivery and content. Our results indicate that training occurs at early stages in managers’ careers, remote training technologies are frequently used, and significant gender differences in training perceptions exist. Limita-tions and future research directions are provided, as are management implications.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

50 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

320 Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

then made to the survey to accommodate changes that have occurred in the sales training environment since the previous review. In the initial phase, 20 practicing sales managers were contacted via phone and were asked a series of open-ended questions about their current sales management training practices. The purpose of this phase was to uncover recent sales manager training developments. One notable change from this phase was the addition of Internet-based training processes. In particular, managers cited a variety of uses of their Internet and intranet Web technology as important means of communication and sales development. In the second phase, the information from the phone interviews along with topics from a variety of academic sources, including textbooks and other publications, were used to further develop the initial survey instrument (e.g., Ingram et al. 2006; Shepherd and Ridnour 1995). In the third phase, the questionnaire was reviewed for face validity by three executives from an inter-national sales management training company that resulted in nominal changes.

The sample population consisted of 1,780 randomly selected companies from an international sales management training company database from over 11,000 companies across all 50 states. Although the sample was obtained from a company that deals with sales management training, the sample population selected for this study has not received sales management training from this firm. The sample represented 20 industry categories that included business services, telecom-munications, manufacturing, financial services, health care, chemicals, and electronics. The data included the name and address of the company along with the contact information of a key sales executive who could meaningfully contribute to the research project. Participants were e-mailed the online survey that included a brief description of the study, a promise of anonymity, and a Web link to access the survey. Two weeks after the initial invitation, a second request to complete the survey was e-mailed to all participants. No inducements were used in the request for participation.

ResULts and findinGs

Of the 1,780 e-mail addresses to which surveys were sent, 727 were returned as undeliverable due to an invalid e-mail address, resulting in a sample of 1,053 potential respon-dents. One hundred forty-five usable questionnaires were returned, for a response rate of 13.8 percent. This sample is slightly larger than that of Anderson, Mehta, and Strong (1997), who reported an analysis sample of 123 respondents. Nonresponse bias is an important concern in conducting field research. Accordingly, the procedures recommended by Armstrong and Overton (1977) were used to determine whether late participants responded in a manner like that of early participants. The sample was divided into quartiles based

on the time a completed questionnaire was received, which was tracked automatically by the software used to capture the data from participants. While significant differences between late responders and early responders would indicate the pres-ence of nonresponse bias, no such differences were observed between early and late responders. These results imply, but do not guarantee, that nonresponse bias does not materially affect the results.

The respondents represented sales manager and closely related job titles (national sales manager, vice president of sales, director of sales, global account manager), including those positions that are at a higher level than sales manager in order to account for individuals that are further along in their sales management careers. The respondents averaged 11 years of experience in managing salespeople, compared to 9 years in the previous review. Sixty-eight percent of the respondents were male, compared to 90 percent in the previ-ous review. Of the 145 respondents, 132 had received sales management training. The majority (52.1 percent) of the respondents who had received sales management training during their careers reported receiving over 10 hours of sales management training during the past year, 31.4 percent had received between 1 and 10 hours of sales management train-ing, and 16.5 percent received no sales management training over the past year. These results indicate that the respondents were actively engaged in the sales management profession, and the majority had received training within the past year. Seventy-five percent of respondents reported using sales vol-ume as the most frequently used sales quota system, followed by 21 percent using profit-based quotas and 4 percent using activity-based quotas. The majority of firms (82 percent) reported annual sales volume over $500 million, 11 percent reported sales volumes between $100 million and $500 mil-lion, and the remaining 7 percent of firms had sales volumes under $100 million. This compares to only 38 percent of respondent firms with sales volumes of over $100 million in the previous review.

In order to determine whether there were differences in the results based on company size, we split the sample into smaller (annual sales of less than $500 million) and larger (annual sales of more than $500 million) companies. The results indicated no differences between the two groups with regard to the percent receiving sales management training as well as perceptions of the topics covered in a sales training program ( p > 0.10). This is an interesting finding, as anecdotal evidence suggests that larger firms tend to have more formal-ized sales training programs (Cron and DeCarlo 2009). The results of this study indicate that this may not be the case for sales management training, perhaps indicating the universal need for this aspect of management training. In addition, we found no differences between large and small firms as to the perceived importance, effectiveness, and satisfaction

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

50 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

Fall 2010 321

of sales management training (all p > 0.30). Based on these results, we collapse across firm size and report the data in the aggregate. We now turn to the results for the six research objectives noted above.

availability and timing of sales Management training

Results suggest that almost all the respondents (91 percent) received sales management training during their careers. Thus, it appears that companies have not only recognized the importance of sales management training but have taken steps to make such training readily available. Such a finding is also consistent with the growing body of literature in human resources suggesting that management training is an important driver of firm perfor-mance (e.g., Bhattacharya and Wright 2005; Khatri 2000).

Table 1 indicates the respondents’ position at the time they received their initial sales management training. Consistent with previous research (Anderson, Mehta, and Strong 1997), we classified the field, branch, or district sales management positions as lower level and senior management positions such as regional, general, or national sales manager as upper level. The majority of respondents received their initial training as a field sales manager (30.3 percent) or as a branch sales man-ager (28.8 percent). Overall, two-thirds of the respondents indicated that they were provided management training in lower-level sales management positions (field, branch, or district sales managers) and one-third of the respondents indicated that they received initial training at senior manage-ment positions (regional, general, or national sales manager). These results suggest that the majority of firms are providing sales management training at an early career stage.

form and Location of sales Management training

In order to understand the nature of the form and location of training, respondents were asked to report a primary category with a follow-up question asking for other categories used. Thus, Tables 2 and 3 reflect individual categories only with the multiple form or site column accounting for multiple mentions of the same category. As shown in Table 2, on-the-job training (42.8 percent) was most frequently mentioned as the primary form of training, followed by training conducted by another firm hired by the organization (37.8 percent). Only 14.3 percent of the respondents were provided training conducted by a college or university and 3.1 percent of the respondents received training from self-study training materi-als. These results indicate that a majority of companies tend to rely on management consultants or on-the-job experiences for their sales management training.

When provided the opportunity to list as many forms of sales management training programs used by a respondent’s organization, on-the-job training was the most commonly

cited form of training (82.6 percent). The results also suggest that today’s managers are likely to hire another firm to conduct the training (81.6 percent) as well as offer self-study materials (67.3 percent). (It is important to note that our definition of self-study materials includes the use of Internet-based train-ing.) Approximately 35 percent (34.7 percent) indicated a reliance on training conducted by a college or university.

Table 3 illustrates the various sites used for conducting sales management training. Of the primary sites, the major-ity of respondent (69.4 percent) reported that training was conducted at the facilities of another firm hired by their organization. On-the-job training was reported by 16.3 per-cent of respondents, and 9.2 percent indicated that training was conducted primarily at a college or university. Training at company facilities as the primary site was reported by 3.1 percent of the respondents, suggesting a trend of either out-sourcing sales manager training to external service companies or utilizing a “neutral” site for training.

When the respondent was provided an opportunity to list multiple sites for sales management training, 87.8 percent reported training at a facility of another firm, while on-the-job training (42.9 percent) and training at company facilities (33.7 percent) appeared to be used considerably less. In addition, training at a college or university does not appear to be a major factor in management’s sales management training decisions (16.3 percent). In combination, these results suggest that companies tend to rely on commercial/professional training firms to fulfill their management training needs.

Methods of sales Management training

Table 4 provides a breakdown of the teaching methods used in sales management training. Two-thirds (66.7 percent) of the respondents reported that group discussions were used, followed closely by role-playing instruction (60.6 percent). Approximately 55 percent used case studies and 53 percent

Table 1Sales Manager’s Position on First Receiving

Sales Management Training

Position Levels Percent of Total

Higher Level National sales manager 12.1 General sales manager 11.4 Regional sales manager 9.8 Total higher level 33.3Lower Level District sales manager 7.6 Branch sales manager 28.8 Field sales manager 30.3 Total lower level 66.7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

50 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

322 Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

reported using Internet-based training. Other methods used included seminars (50 percent), motivational speakers (32.6 percent), videotapes/films (24.2 percent), and videoconfer-encing (23.5 percent). Methods used to a lesser extent were college courses (11.4 percent), audiotapes (9.1 percent), and correspondence courses (5.3 percent). As would be expected, there was a substantial use of Internet-based training (noted by more than half the respondents in the current study). In comparison, the use of motivational speakers, college courses,

and correspondence courses were used less frequently. Interest-ingly, all these methods have components that can be replaced, completely or in part, by Internet-based technology.

type of instructor Used

In terms of the types of instructors used (see Table 5), the majority of respondents (59.9 percent) reported using their own company’s management training staff as instructors. More than half the respondents (56.1 percent) indicated using inde-pendent sales management consultants. The respondents also reported relatively high frequencies of using their own senior sales managers as instructors (41.7 percent). To a lesser extent, respondents reported the use of national sales managers (26.5 percent) and marketing managers from their own companies (25 percent). Consistent with the relatively low numbers using training at colleges and universities noted earlier, only 12.1 percent of the respondents reported being trained by academic professionals. These results follow the general pattern that the majority of firms are using their own company’s staff and com-mercially available training while a relatively small percentage use academic-based sales management training.

topics covered

Table 6 categorizes the responses to the opened-ended ques-tion about the topics covered in the sales management training

Table 2Forms of Sales Management Training Programs

PercentageForms Primary Form Multiple Forms*

On-the-Job Training 42.8 82.6Self-Study Training Material from My Company 3.1 67.3Training Conducted at a College/University 14.3 34.7Training Conducted by Another Firm Hired by My Company 37.8 81.6Other (e.g., Trade Associations) 2.0 15.3

* Total exceeds 100 percent due to multiple responses.

Table 3Sites for Conducting Sales Management Training

Percentage Sites Primary Site Multiple Sites*

On-the-Job Training 16.3 42.9At My Company’s Training Facilities 3.1 33.7At a College or University 9.2 16.3At a Training Facility of Another Firm 69.4 87.8Other (e.g., Trade Associations) 2.0 28.6

* Total exceeds 100 percent due to multiple responses.

Table 4Methods Used in Sales Management

Training Programs

Method Percentage*

Group Discussions 66.7Role Playing 60.6Case Studies 55.3Internet-Based Training 53.0Seminars 50.0Motivational Speakers 32.6Videotapes/Films 24.2Videoconferencing 23.5College or University Courses 11.4Audiotapes 9.1Correspondence Courses 5.3

* Total exceeds 100 percent due to multiple responses.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

50 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

Fall 2010 323

programs (“What are the most important topics that have been covered in your sales management training programs? Please list these topics in the box below”). These freely elicited thoughts were independently coded by the third author into one of six categories of sales management training topics—sales process, leadership, coaching, human resources, performance management, and team building. A subsequent review by all the authors resolved any discrepancies through discussion.

The majority (65.9 percent) of respondents noted the importance of topics pertaining to the sales process. This category included specific responses for account manage-ment, negotiation, strategic selling, and value-added selling. In addition, there were a significant number of responses dealing with goal setting, developing sales strategies, strategic sales planning, and recruiting new salespeople. Sales manager leadership was the second most frequently listed topic (40.9 percent). Specific topics included manager accountability, demonstrated leadership, and the ability to motivate. In ad-dition to leadership, the topic of coaching was mentioned by 37.1 percent of respondents. More generally, 78 percent of respondents noted the importance of leadership and coach-ing. Finally, respondents noted the importance of human resource skills (12.1 percent), performance management skills (e.g., evaluation 10.6 percent), and team building skills (4.5 percent). In sum, the results suggest that the selling process, leadership, and evaluation and control activities are topics that are paramount to sales management training.

differences by Gender

As a follow up to the open-ended questions, respondents were asked to rate the importance of selected sales manager training skills using a seven-point semantic differential scale (1 = “not important”; 7 = “very important”). The specific skills selected to evaluate focused on topics related to behavior-based skills, as evidence suggests that female sales managers tend to spend more time using behavior-based training activities than their male counterparts (Piercy, Cravens, and Lane 2003). Based on Piercy, Cravens, and Lane’s (2003) findings, we expect that women will place greater importance than men on training topics such as communication and teamwork. Specifically, we examined the relative importance by gender of the following four topics: sensitivity to cultural issues, ability to provide ef-fective verbal feedback, management of team dynamics, and ability to build trust with the sales force.

One-way analysis of variance results by gender revealed that women (M = 6.18) placed significantly more emphasis than men on training issues dealing with culture (M = 5.79; F(1, 130) = 3.98; p < 0.05). Women (M = 6.82) also indicated more importance than men on the ability to provide effective verbal feedback to the sales force (M = 6.36; F(1, 130) = 7.75; p < 0.05) as well as greater emphasis on training for effec-

tive team dynamics for women (Mfemale = 6.52, M

male = 6.16;

F(1, 130) = 4.59; p < 0.05). The ability to build sales force trust, however, appears to be equally important to both men and women (M

female = 6.82, M

male = 6.58; F(1, 130) = 2.93;

p > 0.05).

Perceptions of sales Management training Programs

Finally, we examined respondent perceptions of the impor-tance, effectiveness, and satisfaction of their current sales training programs by testing whether the mean is significantly greater than the scale midpoint. As shown in Table 7, manag-ers recognized the importance of sales manager training to sustaining a strategic advantage in the marketplace (M = 5.89, p < 0.05). Moreover, when asked whether their skills were sufficient to succeed without further training in sales manage-ment, respondents reported that additional sales management training would be needed (M = 3.83), however, the mean was not significantly different than the midpoint. Respondents also reported their overall level of effectiveness as significantly enhanced by the sales management training they received (M = 5.61, p < 0.05). Finally, the overall level of satisfaction with recent sales management training was significantly higher than the scale midpoint (M = 5.27, p < 0.05). Collectively, these results indicate that in addition to salesperson training, sales manager training appears to be perceived as a strategic asset in enhancing overall sales effectiveness.

Table 5Instructors at Sales Management Training Programs

Instructor Percentage*

Company Management Training Staff 59.9Sales Management Consultant Hired by 56.1 Your CompanySenior Sales Managers from Your Company 41.7National Sales Manager from Your Company 26.5Marketing Managers from Your Company 25.0Academic Professionals in Sales Management 12.1

* Total exceeds 100 percent due to multiple responses.

Table 6Topics Covered in Sales Management

Training Programs

Sales Management Training Topics Percentage

Sales Process 65.9Leadership 40.9Coaching 37.1Human Resources 12.1Performance Management 10.6Team Building 4.5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

50 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

324 Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

discUssiOn and ManaGeRiaL iMPLicatiOns

From a pragmatic standpoint, understanding current sales management training practices is important as there has been an increased focus on developing manager knowledge as well as significant advances in ways to deliver information over the past decade (Ricks, Williams, and Weeks 2008). Accord-ingly, the purpose of the present study is to investigate current practices of sales management training programs in terms of delivery and content. The results of this study provide perspec-tives on the current practices of sales management training and suggest several issues that warrant further consideration and discussion.

It appears that not only are sales managers receiving training at an early stage of their careers, but they are receiving train-ing from more “commercial” versus academic sources. There may be many reasons for this pattern, such as a shift toward more theoretically based teaching and research within the academic sales academy; or it could simply be that there are numerous commercial-based providers of sales management training available. Nonetheless, the continued investments in sales management training and the use of commercial sources may be indicative of the competitive environment that neces-sitates these actions (Magrath 1997; Marshall and Michaels 2001). From a theoretical perspective, the results suggest that firms understand the importance of building the intellectual capital of their sales management team (Hurley and Hult 1998; Kust 2005).

Our results indicate not only that does the number of women entering the sales management profession continue to grow, but that men and women attach different impor-tance weights to sales management training topics. Specifi-cally, women placed greater importance than men on sales

management training topics that deal with communication, teamwork, and sensitivity to cultural issues. These results are consistent with previous research suggesting that women are more competent than men in using behavior-based control activities, such as teamwork and effective communication (Piercy, Cravens, and Lane 2003). Given that men perceive less importance on training in such topics, our results offer some rationale as to why this may be the case.

We also found that companies tend to use on-the-job training and self-study as important pedagogical tools. The advances made in Internet-based delivery methods may ac-count for these results as Internet training might also have been perceived by respondents as a form of both on-the-job and self-study training. More research is needed to verify whether this is indeed the case because our study did not include the Internet as a separate form of training. In addi-tion to the use of technology to support and deliver training, we also found that companies rely on group discussions, role-playing, and case studies in training sales managers. Thus, we see a mix of traditional training methods used with what appears to be the fulfillment of the Web-based training promise.

In terms of the topics of sales management training, our study suggests three major content areas—selling processes, leadership, and evaluation and control—similar to what has been reported in previous research (Anderson, Mehta, and Strong 1997). Anderson, Mehta, and Strong (1997) also reported that there was a limited emphasis on training in broader organizational responsibilities. They concluded that first-line sales managers were not viewed as important mem-bers of marketing management for this reason. We do not find evidence to the contrary at the present time.

In sum, we found that the practice of sales management training reflects a high level of training frequency and a wide-spread use of professional and commercial sources of training. Our results also indicate that managers are generally satisfied with sales management training and that it is perceived as important for success in the field. These findings illustrate how perspectives on training have evolved as previous studies report that sales executives tend to be dissatisfied with training and that its effectiveness is questionable (Chonko, Tanner, and Weeks 1993).

LiMitatiOns and diRectiOns fOR fUtURe ReseaRch

Like all empirical studies, this research has a number of limita-tions that reduce the generalizability of the results. First, the sample was from a data set of potential customers of a large sales consulting firm. Although the firms surveyed did not use the sponsoring company’s services, it is possible that they have invested in sales manager training in the past (either in-

Table 7Sales Manager Perceptions of Sales

Management Training

MeanPerceptions (SD)

Overall level of satisfaction with sales 5.27* management training received? (1.3)Overall importance of the sales manager 5.89* training your company provides? (1.2)Were your skills as a salesperson sufficient to 3.83 succeed as a sales manager without further (1.4) training in sales management?Overall level of effectiveness of the sales 5.61* management training received? (1.5)

* Mean is significantly different ( p < 0.05) from the scale midpoint (4.0).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

50 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

Fall 2010 325

house or consulting firms). Second, the sample consisted of relatively large firms, and previous studies suggest that larger firms tend to conduct more training than smaller firms (Black, Noel, and Wang 1999; Brown, Hamilton, and Medoff 1990; Patton, Marlow, and Hannon 2000). Together, these two limitations suggest that the sample might have had an upward bias toward training and toward the use of outside training companies/consultants. Hence, future research should target a greater variety of firm sizes. There are other factors that should be considered in future research, such as the growth rates of firms surveyed, as faster-growing firms have been reported to be more likely to provide training (Joyce, McNulty, and Woods 1995).

A third consideration is that the research instrument was based primarily on the survey by Anderson, Mehta, and Strong (1997). Although additional steps were taken to ac-count for recent trends in sales training, it is possible that we missed some important training developments. For example, the questions dealing with Internet-based training might have been too general, as videoconferencing, leadership and motivational videos, and other types of training continue to migrate to an Internet platform. It is possible that our ques-tions were not specific enough to capture these nuanced ap-proaches. Future research should be more proactive by using specifically designed measures in an attempt to capture as much richness of a new concept as possible. Fourth, there are also limitations based on the type of data and the analysis per-formed. In particular, we relied on frequencies to understand current sales management training practices. Future research should further clarify whether the topics mentioned by sales managers significantly contribute to important outcomes, such as sales growth, as anecdotal evidence suggests there is significant return on investment when sales personnel access available training tools (Cron and DeCarlo 2009). Although the measurement and evaluation of training programs remains a challenging area (Attia, Honeycutt, and Attia 2002; Honey-cutt, Howe, and Ingram 1993; Leach and Liu 2003; Lupton, Weiss, and Peterson 1999), future research can help clarify the influence of sales management training on individual and company performance.

In conclusion, research dealing with sales management training practices has been limited, and this paper represents an effort to provide an update. This study has identified the current status of the importance, role, and use of sales manage-ment training. We hope the results can be used by researchers and practitioners to frame future studies in an effort to advance our understanding of management training practices.

RefeRences

Adams, Velma A. (1965), “Field Sales Managers Cry: ‘Give Us More Training,’” Sales Management (April), 25–27.

Anderson, Rolph, Rajiv Mehta, and James Strong (1997), “An Empirical Investigation of Sales Management Training Programs for Sales Managers,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 17, 3 (Summer), 53–66.

Armstrong, Scott J., and Terry S. Overton (1977), “Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys,” Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (August), 396–402.

Arthur, Winfred, Jr., Winston Bennett, Jr., Pamela S. Edens, and Suzanne T. Bell (2003), “Effectiveness of Training in Organizations: A Meta-Analysis of Design and Evaluation Features,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (2), 234–245.

Attia, Ashraf M., Earl D. Honeycutt, and Magdy M. Attia (2002), “The Difficulties of Evaluating Sales Training,” Industrial Marketing Management, 31 (3), 253−259.

Bhattacharya, Mousumi, and Patrick M Wright (2005), “Manag-ing Human Assets in an Uncertain World: Applying Real Options Theory to HRM,” International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16 (June), 929–948.

Black, Dan A., Brett J. Noel, and Zheng Wang (1999), “On the Job Training, Establishment Size and Firm Size: Evidence for Economies of Scale in the Production of Human Capi-tal,” Southern Economic Journal, 66 (July), 82–100.

Brown, Charles, James Hamilton, and James L. Medoff (1990), Employers Large and Small, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Chonko, Lawrence B., John F. Tanner, and William A. Weeks (1993), “Sales Training: Status and Needs,” Journal of Per-sonal Selling & Sales Management, 13, 4 (Fall), 81−86.

Coppett, John I., and William A. Staples (1980), “An Explor-atory Study of Training Programs for New First-Level Sales Managers,” Akron Business & Economic Review, 9 (1), 36–41.

Cron, William L., and Thomas E. DeCarlo (2009), Dalrymple’s Sales Management, 10th ed., Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Davenport, Thomas H., and Lawrence Prusak (1998), Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Deeter-Schmelz, Dawn R., Karen N. Kennedy, and Daniel J. Goebel (2002), “Understanding Sales Manager Effective-ness: Linking Attributes to Sales Force Values,” Industrial Marketing Management, 31 (October), 617–626.

Honeycutt, Earl D., Jr., Vince Howe, and Thomas Ingram (1993), “Shortcomings of Sales Training Programs,” In-dustrial Marketing Management, 22 (2), 117–123.

Hurley, Robert F., and Tomas G. Hult (1998), “Innovation, Market Orientation, and Organizational Learning: An Integration and Empirical Examination,” Journal of Mar-keting, 62 (July), 42–54.

Ingram, Thomas N., Raymond W. LaForge, Ramon A. Avila, and Charles H. Schwepker (2006), Professional Selling: A Trust-Based Approach, Mason, OH: South-Western.

Jones, Eli, Andrea L. Dixon, Lawrence B. Chonko, and Joseph P. Cannon (2005), “Key Accounts and Team Selling: A Review, Framework, and Research Agenda,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 25, 2 (Spring), 181−198.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

50 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014

326 Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

Joyce, Paul, Tony McNulty, and Adrian Woods (1995), “Work-force Training: Are Small Firms Different?” Journal of European Industrial Training, 19 (5), 19–25.

Khatri, Naresh (2000), “Managing Human Resources for Com-petitive Advantage,” International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11 (2), 336–365.

Kust, Mike (2005), “Walking Away with the ‘Family Jew-els,’” Sales and Marketing Strategies & News E-Zine (May 26) (available at www.thecompetitiveadvantage.net/newsletters/2005/5-26.html).

Leach, Mark P., and Annie H. Liu (2003), “Investigating Inter-relationships Among Sales Training Evaluation Methods,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 23, 4 (Fall), 327−339.

Lupton, Robert A., John E. Weiss, and Robin T. Peterson (1999), “Sales Training Evaluation Model (STEM): A Conceptual Framework,” Industrial Marketing Management, 28 (1), 73−86.

Magrath, Allan J. (1997), “From the Practitioner’s Desk: A Comment on Personal Selling and Sales Management in the New Millennium,” Journal of Personnel Selling & Sales Management, 17, 1 (Winter), 45–47.

Marshall, Greg W., and Ronald E. Michaels (2001), “Research in Selling and Sales Management in the Next Millennium:

An Agenda from the AMA Faculty Consortium,” Journal of Personnel Selling & Sales Management, 21, 1 (Winter), 15–17.

Patton, Dean, Sue Marlow, and Paul Hannon (2000), “The Re-lationship Between Training and Small Firm Performance; Research Frameworks and Lost Quests,” International Small Business Journal, 19 (1), 11–27.

Piercy, Nigel F., David W. Cravens, and Nikala Lane (2003), “Sales Manager Behavioral Control Strategy and Its Con-sequences: The Impacts of Manager Gender Differences,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 23, 3 (Sum-mer), 221–232.

Ricks, Joe M., Jr., Jacqueline A. Williams, and William A. Weeks (2008), “Sales Trainer Roles, Competencies, Skills, and Behaviors: A Case Study,” Industrial Marketing Manage-ment, 37, 5, 593–609.

Shepherd, C. David, and Rick E. Ridnour (1995), “The Training of Sales Managers: An Exploratory Study of Sales Manage-ment Training Practices,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 15, 1 (Winter), 69–74.

Wilson, Phillip H., David Strutton, and Theodore M. Farris II (2002), “Investigating the Perceptual Aspect of Sales Train-ing,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 22, 2 (Spring), 77–86.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

50 0

9 O

ctob

er 2

014