Henley Management College

Relationship selling: Exploring the Dynamic Interactions between Tangible and Intangible Influences on Transactional Outcomes

Written by Andy Blandford (#3564/1999)

Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Business Administration 2002

Contents

Abstract Part 1: Study and exploration 1 2 Introduction Approach and methodology 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 3 Interactional behaviour Purchase involvement Relational development Personality traits Methodology selection

4 6 7 9

Conceptualisation 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 Communication Impressions Information exchange Persuasion Negotiation Transaction and support Literature research summary 3.7.1 Creating trust 3.7.2 Identifying need 3.7.3 Delivering value satisfaction 3.7.4 Adaptive selling

16 17 18 19 19 20 21 21

The Perception Framework 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 The function of The Perception Framework Defining The Perception Framework construction parameters Identifying tangible and intangible drivers Using The Perception Framework Applications for The Perception Framework

24

Data collection 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 Building the questionnaires Questionnaire testing Fieldwork: Approach and methodology Respondent targeting Respondent selection Survey experiences Study limitations

28 28 30 31 34 35 36 32 37 38 41 44 45 48 50 51 52 53 56 57 59 60 61 62

Evaluation of findings 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 Evaluation matrix Discussion: buyer data Discussion: seller data Discussion of findings Critique of the study Conclusions from the study Directions for future research cycles

Part 2: Theory exploration 7 8 Application Implications of the study 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 Bibliography Appendices Appendix1: The Perception Framework Appendix2: Buyer and seller alignment Appendix3: The Questionnaire (questions) Appendix4: Buyer data set An emergent theory: The Inter-transactional process An emergent theory: Generalisability An emergent theory: Significance An emergent theory: Precision, Replication and Verification

71 72 73 74

Appendix5: Seller data set Appendix6: Framework factor analysis

75 76

Abstract The fundamental concern of marketing is to establish how and why consumers buy a particular product. Relationship marketing largely focuses upon the cognitive elements in the transactional decision making process, in the widespread belief that cognitive influences are more dominant than conative influences in buyer decision making behaviour; with applications focused on elements that enable sellers to better influence transactional outcomes by empowering the product to do much of the selling itself; and as a discipline is primarily oriented to high volume mass markets through the predominant use of branding and packaging strategies. With recent dramatic shifts in the competitive orientation of organisations globally from transactional focus toward relational focus, where organisations are seeking to get closer to the customer; and considering the prevalent focus of much relationship marketing studies and applications on information and customer management processes; concern is growing about the future direction of relationship marketing, in the wider context of whether the discipline is truly moving toward customers or away from them. Using grounded theory (Glaser, 1992; Strauss, 1991; OCallaghan, 1996), this study adopted a distinctive five-stepped methodology that creates a continuous programme of research and application to explore the implications and argument that it is how people prefer to buy, rather than why people buy that is of greater significance in transactional outcomes; and that it is the alignment or misalignment between seller and buyer that determines the transactional outcome, rather than the product/service components or environment of the transaction. The context of a one-to-one transactional setting [relationship selling] represents a higher order of complexity than relationship marketing transactional settings; primarily due to the unpredictable and dynamic natures of the buyer and seller interactions of personality and perceptions; and it is certainly arguable that relationship marketing principles are less applicable in this transactional context. This study develops and sets out the emergent theory for the Inter-transactional Process; which postulates that commercial and social interactions are determined by

the interaction between dynamic tangible and intangible drivers; and provides a mechanism for measuring, interpreting and prognosticating transactional outcomes. This study develops The Perception Framework for quantitatively measuring the dynamic interaction between cognitive and conative influences on transactional outcomes; identifies the factors, dimensions and barriers that determine buyer buying preferences, in the context of how they would prefer to buy; rather than what they would prefer to buy; thereby enabling greater incidences of positive and valuable transactional outcomes through more effective marketing processes and tactics. This study develops a diagnostic tool to identify misalignment between seller and buyer at the Organisational and individual level; identify sales and marketing deficiencies; and prognoses remediation requirements; thereby assisting increases in productivity, improvements in staff effectiveness, and reductions in operational costs such as training.

Part 1:

Study and exploration

Introduction

In Singapore, the introduction of the Financial Advisers Act 2001 [FAA] January 2002 has created a unified regulatory environment that dramatically changes the market landscape, particularly with the introduction of IFA licensing. Considering our extensive experience, core competences and regional market presence, these new regulations represent a significant opportunity to enter Singapores domestic market and seize substantial market share. In conducting previous studies on market attraction in the Singapore domestic financial services market; it quickly became apparent that the sales tactics utilised by most financial salespeople could be termed as hard-closing; viewed as a series of struggles that [they] must win" (Jolson, 1997, p. 76); where most prefer to sell hard what they know best rather than taking the trouble to identify appropriate buyer needs (Saxe and Weitz, 1982; Ebejer and Morden, 1988). This was supported by the observation that most sales presentations were of a single meeting nature [generally lasting 2-3 hours]; with general closing ratios of 10-25% [informal admissions by life company managers]. We intend to enter the market in 2003; utilising a competitive strategy based upon differentiation: professional leadership; with the goal of securing substantial market share in the new IFA segment. To achieve this, we will need to recruit and retrain existing salespeople already operating in the sector. This leads us to two practical issues. Firstly, how do we determine the extent of misalignment between incumbent agent sales practices, and how buyers would prefer to buy; and in so doing deliver palpable differentiation in the buyers experience when meeting our representative? Additionally, the development of an effective management system for measuring customer satisfaction can provide early warning signals, thereby enabling the organisation to avoid losing market share in the future (Pacheco, 1989). Without a practical solution to this issue, the organisation could well adopt training and mentoring programmes that prolong any buyer-seller misalignment in the sales process; constraining productivity and business quality gain opportunities; reducing organisational effectiveness; and ultimately threatening the organisations ambitions in the market.

Secondly, how do we reduce the risk of incorrect judgments based on impressions and discussions during the staff selection process? Existing research does suggest that there is value in determining the connection between selection processes and salesperson performance (Ford et al., 1987; Gable et al., 1992; Lamont and Lundstrom, 1977; Gibson, 1993). We will need to be sure that the investment in retraining is appropriately focused on individuals that can demonstrate the capacity to balance their own motives with those of the buyer. With the first issue, the objective fits with our existing international business practice [referral only] and organisational mission [professional leadership]. In the second, appropriate selection methodology would make the task of retraining easier, more effective, and reduce investment risk. Given the organisational mission, it could be argued that the development or introduction of innovative sales and business practices into a market that can be generally characterised as seller oriented could be considered a new product in the context of buyer perception. Innovative business practices is seen as holding the key to this organisations biggest problem; gaining and sustaining competitive advantage, and represents one of our top priorities in market entry (Crawford, 1994; Wheelwright and Clark, 1992; Day et al, 1992). If these performance issues are not addressed and adequate systems put into place, then the organisation faces the real threat of failing in its competitive strategy to secure and retain professional leadership in Singapores IFA segment. The overall objective for this paper is to better understand what drives consumer transactional outcomes in the environment of one-to-one relationship selling; so that a tool might be developed that can better orient sales practices toward consumer buying preferences. The ability of the salesperson to better adapt their transactional behaviour toward a better alignment with the buyers perspective directly determines the effectiveness of the relationship building process, and consequent longer-term economic potential (Miles et al, 1990). Section2 examines the best means to balance academic methodology with business necessity and develops a five-stepped continuous programme of research and

application from grounded theory research, and uses this as the content structure for this paper. Section3 explores the sales process through literature research. Section4 develops The Perception Framework which is used to manage and construct data collection mechanisms for Section5; with Section6 evaluating and discussing the collected data using an evaluation matrix. Section7 describes how the resulting diagnostic tool can be applied as a management tool; with section8 exploring the implications of the study in terms of emergent theory.

10

Approach and methodology

Here we examine research methodology undertaken in literature in order to determine how best to balance academic methodology with business necessity, since the study objective is to develop a management tool that can be organisationally applied. The problem described in Section1 relates to the personal interactions between buyer and seller during a transactional exchange, where the potential outcome is dependent upon the dynamic interaction between both parties, and as such is difficult to predict (Teare, 1998; Zeithaml and Bitner, 1996; Hkansson et al., 1976). To ascertain which methodology is most appropriate, we need to explore the fluid issues of interactional preferences and how these are [or might be] influenced by factors such as interactional behaviour, purchase involvement, relational development and personality traits.

2.1

Interactional behaviour

The fundamental concern of marketing is to establish how and why consumers buy a particular product, in order to better predict the outcome of a transaction, and thereby understand how better to influence the perceived uncertainty of the buyer (Hkansson et al., 1976). With many rational and irrational reasons for consumer behaviour, and with each decision also influenced by tangible and intangible factors, this is a challenging and dynamic issue. Additionally, these reasons and factors are also prevalent in the sellers behaviour in a relationship selling transactional environment such as that of personal financial services; resulting in a highly complex and multi-dynamic environment with the potential for "building an aura of trust and warmth that should ensure a permanent bond between buyer and seller (Jolson, 1997, p. 76). To identify and understand patterns of buyer behaviour, Teare (1998) suggests that a continuous programme of research is needed, where the unconscious reasons of behaviour are probed using qualitative methodology in addition to the tracking of responses by questionnaire. This suggests that the process of better understanding

11

consumer behaviour patterns needs to rely upon qualitative methodologies more so than quantitative. According to Ryan and Bonfield (1975, p. 122), behaviour has generally been defined as the "observation of an individual's choice in a situation", and was able to develop a dichotomous variable to indicate whether a purchase had been made by sampling actual purchase behaviour of consumers as they left a shop. The outcome of this study was dependent upon the focus of the issue: was a fruit drink purchase made? Therefore a quantitative approach was valid, given the objective of a yes, or no response. What might the outcome have been if the study had focused upon how might the customer have been motivated to buy a fruit drink product in that shop, even if this was not the product objective of the respondents visit? What about consumer behaviour, in the context of consumer decision making? Strong (1997) identified and explored the problems of translating consumer principles into consumer purchase behaviour, where consumer beliefs play a central role (Ajzen, 1985). Shaw and Clarke (1999) explored these principles in their study which focused on how and when beliefs are brought to bear on issues or principles important to the consumer, and highlighted that existing behaviour research has tended to focus on decision making rather than choice formulation; revealing the complexities between issues important to consumer buying comfort; and that existing consumer behaviour models support a deterministic view of decision making, to the neglect of the often complex relationships and constraints surrounding the link between thought and action (Shaw and Clarke, 1999). In their study, utilising focus groups and elicitation questionnaires, Shaw and Clarke focused on qualitative and quantitative sampling to build a framework adaptation of Ajzen and Fishbeins (1980) theory of planned behaviour (TPB). However, in the more dynamic interactional environment of one-to-one relationship selling, the only element that could be classified as planned is the greeting. All other interactions can be classified as variable, and therefore difficult to relate to the principles of any TPB framework. Significantly, there has been increased interest in exploring salesperson behaviour in the context of buyer and seller bonding through trust (Doney and Cannon, 1997; Ramsey and Sohi, 1997; Swan et al, 1988), but little work has been undertaken on relationship selling, particularly in the context of its utilisation in the much broader

12

literature and practices related to relationship marketing (Boles et al, 1997; Doney and Cannon, 1997). As a consequence, it would appear that exploration of the impacts on one-to-one buyer-seller relationships and transactions from potentially disparate orientations and perspectives is very sparse indeed. Given the dramatic shifts in competitive orientation of organisations globally from transactional focus toward relational focus, where organisations are seeking to get closer to the customer, this lack of study concerning the interaction dynamics between a sellers agent and the buyer does give some concerns about the future direction of relationship marketing, in the wider context of whether organisations are truly moving toward the customer or away from them; particularly given the prevalent focus on information rather than the person the organisation is dealing with. While an interesting area of debate, this issue is beyond the scope of this paper. However, it would be interesting to see if any diagnostic tool delivered by this paper could be adapted to relationship marketing contexts.

2.2

Purchase involvement

Laurent and Kapferer (1985) concluded that "no single indicator of involvement could satisfactorily describe, explain, or predict involvement, promoting instead that an involvement profile be adopted by researchers to better understand the nature of any relationship between a buyer and product. Hughes et al (1998) utilised this approach in their study of purchase involvement theory on Greek cheese products, aimed at improving product marketing methodology; sampling consumers on several perceptions of importance for a range of cheese products, using face-to-face interviews at respondents homes. While the conclusions offered by the study were inconclusive, the study demonstrates that intangibles [or latency] can be sampled and measured by the use of everyday products, even if those products were not in evidence during the interviews. What might the outcome have been if the study had focused instead upon how the customer would have preferred the cheese was made? Would respondents have had the knowledge or competency to be able to respond appropriately to such a question? What if the study had focused on products or services that were not considered everyday, and were not in evidence during the interviews? In those instances, how then would the researcher have measured, separated or evaluated cognitive and conative perceptions?

13

2.3

Relational development

The concept of relationship satisfaction was attributed with three dimensions by Crosby and Stevens (1987); satisfactory interactions with personnel; satisfaction with the core service (the extent to which a service satisfies customer need); and satisfaction with the organisation. In the context of relationship selling (Yoho, 1998) in personal financial services, it can be argued that the salesperson is the organisation, in terms of buyer perception, since the salesman is often the exclusive interface between the organisation and buyer (Lambert et al, 1997) and as such significantly influences the buyers perception of the organisation (Beatty et al, 1996). Trust contributes to satisfaction and any long-term relationship potential between buyer and seller and is conducive to any economic outcomes from such a relationship (Geyskens, 1998). Bijou and Palmers (1998) exploratory study on relationship failure focused upon the concepts of trust and commitment behaviours of consumers toward a services seller, where a critical failure in service satisfaction occurred. Their study largely explored the relationship between how long the seller-buyer relationship had existed prior to critical failure, and the factors leading to critical failure. One conclusion they promoted was that sellers need to understand better the causes and impact of service failure, and how it impacts any future buyer relationship with the seller. What might have been the outcome if the exploratory study had not just focused on why service failed, but on how respondents perceived the service failed, and how the seller could have resolved the failure? Studies of relationship quality have drawn heavily on the social psychology literature of interpersonal relationships, for example in explaining trust (Pruitt, 1981; Sullivan and Peterson, 1982). But as has been discussed previously, trust represents only one element in the complexity of buyer-seller interaction. Some studies were able to identify individual components of relationship quality by employing measurement devices founded on social psychology (Lagace et al, 1991) to examine trust and satisfaction, ultimately identifying the importance of seller alignment with the buyer. However, the existence of trust and satisfaction in a relationship is not necessarily the predicator of a successful transactional outcome, particularly if the rewards from the satisfaction have not been correctly addressed and fulfilled between the parties (Graham, 1985a). An examination of the relationship between trust and need

14

[conceptualised as the exchange or transfer of value between parties] might therefore be a more appropriate means of determining buyer and seller levels of satisfaction, where the value satisfied might also consist of unspecified exchanges in the future as part of a longer term developing relationship. Thus it can be implied that the building of a quality relationship between buyer and seller is crucial to longer-term value satisfaction for both parties (Bowen and Schneider, 1985; Czepiel et al, 1975), which is a particular issue for financial products given their long-term nature. Other studies of relationship quality have focused upon the activities of salespeople in the context of their selling behaviours (Crosby et al, 1990). Certainly this is an important direction of exploration for this paper since once the buyer perspective has been defined and measured; the sellers orientation can then be measured against the buyers to determine the extent of misalignment or alignment in sales practices in the context of value satisfaction. However, it is the buyers perspective that is important since this should form the basis for any measurement; and consequently defines where the sellers orientation and behaviour should be moving toward.

2.4

Personality traits

Much research to date has focused on the analysis of personality traits such as aggressiveness and sociability with the aim of establishing that behaviour is connected to personality types (Chisnall (1994), whereas others have tried to link buying habits with product characteristics. Kassarjian and Sheffet (1981) defined the relationship between personality and purchase behaviour as consistent responses to the world of stimuli surrounding the individual, in their wide-ranging review; and concluded that "the correlation or relationship between personality test scores and consumer behaviour variables such as product choice, media exposure, innovation, segmentation, etc., are weak at best and thus of little value in prediction".

2.5

Methodology selection

In simple terms, the conventional approach and methodology of academic research is to define a hypothesis; and then set out to explore the pertinent issues with the goal of proving or disproving the hypothesis, depending on the quality of the

15

research and analysis undertaken. Defining a hypothesis is contingent on there being a proven or broadly recognised theory in existence about the subject at hand. As the previous discussions have indicated, this is certainly not the case in the dynamic interactional behaviour between buyer and seller, in the context of relationship selling [itself arguably a new academic field]; where little constructive attention appears to have been applied to determining or measuring the dynamic interaction between cognitive and conative drivers on transactional or relational outcomes. It certainly is not clear whether research should be focusing upon utility, perception, trust, satisfaction, value, or any number of the multiple aspects of relationship quality as an outcome or development. So, what do we do if there appears to be little proven or recognised theory on the subject in hand [tangible and intangible determination] from which to formulate a hypothesis? We could look for an alternative issue to study (Goulding, 1998, Guba and Lincoln, 1994) yet the business problem already described (section1) is a significant issue, and one that does need addressing if the organisation hopes to meet its competitive goals. The solution to this dilemma between academic methodology and business necessity in this case is grounded theory, since it represents the systematic generation of theory that is readily modifiable from data acquired by rigorous research methodology so that we can better understand the actions taking place on a substantive area, from the perspectives of the actors involved (Glaser, 1998). This is not to say that we proceed on a blank sheet basis to see what happens! Rather, proceeding on the basis of the concept already discussed; that of better understanding buyer and selling interaction as the initial focus; but without preconceiving the eventual conjecture (Bigus et al, 1994). In this fashion, we can allow the research to determine the path to the solution, more as an emergent conjecture which can identify further research needs, leading to new emergent conjecture, and so on (Glaser et al, 1967), and further argued by Glaser (1998) that this approach represents the where next and for what as research develops in sociative contexts, while still fulfilling the generally recognised goal of constructing theories in order to understand phenomena (Haig, 1995). Certainly there is much debate between both discoverers of grounded theory as to which approach is the most appropriate; with Glasers arguments centered on a qualitative focus (Glaser, 1992); and Strauss on a quantitative focus (Strauss,

16

Fig2.5: Methodology
Conceptualisation

1991). It is not the objective for this paper to debate which camp is right or wrong. Having considered the arguments of both schools and methodological procedures for grounded theory (OCallaghan, 1996); a five-stepped methodology has been adopted (Fig2.5) aimed at delivering the structure for creating a continuous research programme (Teare, 1998) and ultimately shaping a learning organisation. Furthermore, since there appears to be little recognised theory on one-to-one relationship selling contexts, any research programme undertaken needs additional rigor, given the dynamic natures already discussed and the consequent requirement to utilise

Framework

Data collection

Evaluation

Application

Authors own work

quantitative and qualitative research methods in the context of business application. The first step conceptualises the problem and issues using a qualitative approach (Glaser, 1978, 1992) by exploring the fundamental components of the sales process in the context of how these might influence buying preferences and so identify the primary elements that need measuring and evaluating. The second step moves the conceptualisation into a quantitative framework (Strauss and Corbin, 1990; Strauss 1991) to establish a defined set of research principles [precision] from which to construct a set of questionnaires for data collection. This framework represents the central mechanism [replicability] to manage future research cycles. The fourth step evaluates [generalisability] the qualitative and quantitative data collected [third step] to validate The Perception Framework and conceptualisation steps already used, so ensuring that future research precision and replicability can be maintained in light of the data findings; and identifying any fundamental issues about the methodology or defined research principles for subsequent cycles. This evaluation feeds back into re-conceptualisation, thereby recommencing the methodological process. The fifth step applies the study findings [significance] as adapted business practices or policy; which in itself delivers additional data for study, adding new dimensions to the entire process as it recycles, refining the study process [verification] through the

17

test of reality (Orton, 1997). This fifth step should facilitate the avoidance of many research pitfalls such as under-analysis or over-induction (Strauss and Corbin, 1994; Baker et al; Morse, 1994; Stern 1994; Wells 1995; Skodol-Wison and AmblerHutchinson; 1996; Riley, 1996). While it is the intention for this paper to utilise only one cycle in this methodological process (fig2.5), it is realistic to expect that dozens of applications will need to take place before any new business practice is perfected [a loose description]. The concept behind the development of this methodology is to introduce multiple layers of rigor through each cycle in that it brings together quantitative and qualitative methodologies with applicational observations, where each step also comprises the evaluation of the preceding steps [and preceding cycles] as part of forward movement from cycle to cycle. This methodological process allows the researcher to coordinate multiple dimensions of data consistently with the original research principles defined by The Perception Framework; with subsequent cycles continuously broadening data depth while constantly re-verifying this research programme; and effectively developing a compounded rigor effect. Furthermore, this programme provides the capacity for monitoring the evolving sales effectiveness, thus providing an early warning management system (Pacheco, 1989), and acting as a further data dimension and additional layer of rigor.

18

Conceptualisation

Here we explore and conceptualise (fig2.5) the issues relating to the sales process to better identify and understand how components manage or stimulate buyer preferences, in the context of influencing relational and transactional outcomes. Most services can be described as intangible, and as such it is a challenging task to effectively communicate about them (Zeithaml and Bitner, 1996). The sales process can be described as the replicable mechanism from which a relationship can be developed; and can be either simple or complex, depending on the transactional context. The difference between a customer and a client can be expressed largely in terms of the relationship developed to date, and its future potential value (Doyle and Roth, 1992; Beatty et al, 1996; Grewal and Sharma, 1991; Jolson, 1997). A customer can be defined in the context of a single transaction, where future transactions might occur but are less than likely. A client can be defined in the context of a transaction where value [the relationship] has been added by the seller, and meets certain peripheral buyer demands such as trust and need (Crosby and Stephens, 1987); where future transactions are more than likely. Naturally the sellers objective is to maximise the economic and satisfaction value derived from transactions using the sales process to develop a relationship. Where both trust and economic outcomes are conducive to a relationships future success (Geyskens, 1998; Gronroos, 1989), the organisation reduces the effects of everincreasing competition and potential pressures on pricing (Morgan and Hunt, 1994) by replacing the threat of defection with loyalty. Ultimately, buyers and sellers become interrelated and achieve shared goals as an outcome of the ongoing relationship (Levy and Zaltman, 1975; Lovelock, 1983), which becomes a means for gaining competitive advantage (Christopher et al, 1991). As a broad concept, this relational development process follows a similar pathway as Lewins (1951) unfreeze/re-freeze approach to change management (Fig3.0); where the first task of the seller is to unfreeze buying barriers through social and inter-personal identification (Anderson and Narus, 1990); secondly to provide

19

compelling

reasons

Fig3.0: The sales process as a relationship development mechanism

Unfreeze Impressions Information Exchange Mobilise Persuasion Negotiation Refreeze Transaction Support

for the buyer to be mobilised into action (Dyer, 1998; Crosby and Stevens, 1987); and thirdly, re-

Communication Authors own adaptation from Lewin, K, Field theory in social science, New York, Harper & Row, 1951

freeze the buyer as a satisfied and loyal client (La Barbera and Mazursky, 1983; Newman and Werbal, 1973; Oliver and Linda, 1981). A relationship has to develop during the sales process; else a successful transaction is less likely as an outcome. However, whether this transaction is a single closed transaction, or the commencement of an open transactional future, depends largely upon the effectiveness of the sales process components utilised. A variety of relationship development processes [models] have been advocated over the years (e.g. Ford, 1980; Dwyer et al., 1987; Frazier, 1983; Heide, 1994; Lovelock, 1992). Generally, each of these models contains common and fundamental process components such as communication, impressions, information exchange, persuasion, and negotiation (fig3.0).

3.1

Communication

The communication process relates to the issue of how things become meaningful; how meanings are grasped in relation to other things; how it functions or operates; how it can be used; what causes it; and what consequences follow from it (Dewey, 1963). Because people comprehend through the formation of inferences, they largely remember a modified version constructed and guided by prior knowledge, rather than remembering input verbatim (Orasanu and Penney, 1986). Communication is the essence of coordinating behaviour in any transactional environment (Cummings, 1984; Hutt and Speh, 1995; Feiertag, 1997), and depends on the intentions and prior beliefs of both parties throughout the sales process (Usunier, 1996), where a message cannot be understood without its context (Onkvisit, 1993; Hall, 1976). Greater communication similarity between seller and buyer leads to more effective interactions (Triandis, 1960), but this effectiveness can be reduced by cognitive dissimilarities even if cultural backgrounds are similar (Stening, 1979; Cateora, 1983). Literature suggests that communication has a direct impact on central

20

aspects of relationship development such as trust (Mohr and Nevin, 1990), commitment (Hkansson et al., 1976), and coordination (McQuarrie, 1993). Much of the communication throughout the sales process is non-verbal (Gudykunst and TingToomey, 1988) and it is this non-verbal conversation that can make the greatest difference whether the outcome delivers satisfactory value to either party. The matching of the sellers social style to that of the buyer is commonly understood as a method for better communication so that the sellers message is received with greater receptivity (Ingrasci, 1981). However, even in instances where the buyer and seller understand each other communication can be misunderstood because of connotative and denotative differences in meanings; particularly in cross-cultural communication (D'Anglejan and Tucker, 1973). Research also suggests that buyers can easily become overwhelmed with information (Kahneman, 1973; Miller, 1956) unless the communication skills of the seller take into account the ability of the buyer to properly evaluate the product/service complexity (Ebejer and Morden, 1988). Research has determined that certain communication styles possessed by salespeople enable them to identify communication styles in others and thereby exhibit superior adaptability when communicating (Rich and Smith, 2000).

3.2

Impressions

According to Zajonc (1980), findings suggest that on meeting someone for the first time, individuals typically form instant opinions often based on minimal information [from their first impressions] that precede rational thought processes. Much of this instant opinion is based upon non-verbal communication such as body language, facial expressions and gestures (Gudykunst and Ting-Toomey, 1988). Graham (1985c) argues that future bargaining strategy may depend on the accurate initial perception of an individual, where inaccurate impression formation can be detrimental to subsequent and future negotiation stages (Cook and Corey, 1991; Linkemer, 1989; Swan et al, 1984; Weitz et al, 1986). As impressions are formed, a wide range of personal qualities are often assumed (Tsalikis et al, 1991, 1992), frequently influenced by interpersonal or cultural attraction or aversion (Foon, 1986; Zebrowitz-McArthur, 1988). There is evidence to suggest that individuals tend to like others that are similar to themselves in various

21

ways (Poppleton, 1981; Davis and Silk, 1972) and are therefore more likely to identify with each other than with someone who is perceived to be dissimilar (Vernon, 1964; Byrne, 1969; Heider, 1958; Newcombe, 1956), and it is this interpersonal identification that can induce trust between the buyer and seller (Lott, 1965). Naturally, initial impressions are being re-evaluated constantly throughout the sales process, with the buyer inhibiting relationship development if the sellers motives are perceived negatively (Symanski, 1988). The importance of buyer judgment concerning seller ethics has received much attention (Lagace et al, 1991), and there is some suggestion that the buyers perceived expectations of seller behaviour is based upon previous experiences of the ethics of other sellers (Whalen et al, 1991).

3.3

Information exchange

Graham (1987) asserts that the exchange of information between the buyer and seller should define respective needs, and that the effectiveness of communication depends on a clear understanding of expectations. In most relationship selling situations it is important for the seller to commence the exchange process by describing their service and product offering. In so doing, a psychological obligation is created on the part of the buyer to reciprocate. The extent of information offered by the buyer is usually dependent upon the first impressions of the buyer about the seller, reinforced positively or negatively by the sellers subsequent conduct, questioning approach, and perceived competence (Leong et al., 1989; Szymanski and Churchill, 1990). Unless the seller can identify appropriate buyer needs through this information exchange process with which to mobilise the buyer; then there is usually little alternative but for the seller to adopt hard selling tactics (Saxe and Weitz, 1982, Churchill et al, 1985; Symanski, 1988). The introduction of financial services regulation into markets is intended to increase the incidence of appropriate need-based selling by providing a policing mechanism based upon the premise of best advice.

3.4

Persuasion

Graham and Sano, 1984 suggest that there are three basic persuasion styles: the factual-inductive (logic based, e.g. North American); the axiomatic-deductive (ideals based, e.g. former USSR); and the affective-intuitive (emotional based e.g. Arabia).

22

Other studies have shown persuasive tactics to be consistent across countries, for example the logic based aggressive tactics used by North Americans (Van Zandt, 1970; Glenn et al, 1977). In Singapore, the persuasion style most dominant is similar to that of the US, since many of the training programmes deployed are of US origin (e.g. Prudential and AIA). The persuasion phase of the sales process involves the parties' attempts to modify one another's expectations through the use of various persuasive tactics (Hawrysh and Zaichkowsky, 1989), and should take the form of matching the sellers available solutions (product or service offering) to the buyers needs.

3.5

Negotiation

Negotiation is one of the most important elements of the sales process, (Neslin and Greenhalgh, 1983), with the outcome measurable in terms of sale versus no sale (Pennington, 1968) or satisfaction verses dissatisfaction (Dwyer and Walker, 1981). Graham (1985b, 1985c) suggests that of the two, the latter holds as being operationally superior, since it is the satisfaction derived from the transaction that determines the future scope for any longer-term relationship development (Crosby, 1989). Harris and Moran (1987, p55) define negotiation as "a process in which two or more entities come together to discuss common and conflicting interests in order to reach an agreement of mutual benefit". Impressions (Cook and Corey, 1991; Graham, 1985c) of conduct (Saxe and Weitz, 1982); orientation (Jolson, 1997); cultural differences (Simintiras and Thomas, 1998); the respective stakes [perceived gain or loss] of the buyer and seller (Gladwin and walter, 1980); and the nature or complexity of the issue being negotiated (Tung, 1988) can significantly influence the negotiation process. According to Anglemar and Stern (1978) the seller has two bargaining strategies available: representational or instrumental. The choice for the seller depends largely upon how effective the sellers communication has been with the buyer, and the value derived from the information identifies exchange through searches the for sales process. and Representational strategy problems, solutions,

collaborates with the buyer as to which is most appropriate. Instrumental strategy aims to affect the attitude and behaviour of the buyer by using tactics such as persuasive promises, rewards, punishments or commitments. Sellers should avoid

23

instrumental strategies since representational strategies produce more favourable outcomes (Graham 1985a; Rubin and Brown, 1975) through the mutual recognition of need and potential benefits to both parties (Derleda and Grzelak, 1982). Individuals who are attracted are more likely to make concessions during the negotiation process and may give up immediate economic rewards for satisfaction rewards derived from the relationship in the longer-term (Graham, 1985a) such as referrals [seller] or association [buyer].

3.6

Transaction and support

As economies become more service oriented (Bernstein, 1992) sales people become increasingly intertwined in buyer perceptions of service quality and derived satisfaction (Zeithaml et al, 1988). The importance of client satisfaction derives from its professed impact on buyer loyalty in the context of repeat purchasing (La Barbera and Mazursky, 1983) because it can cost five times as much to find new buyers as to sell a further product or service to an existing client (Struebing, 1996). This concept of partnership between buyer and seller depends on the relationship being sustained through superior post-transactional support, and has been an accepted fact by relationship selling practitioners for years (Jolson, 1997).

3.7

Literature research summary

Buyers cannot have much of a relationship with a product, but they can with people (Cahill, 1998). The key to establishing a relationship is the creation of trust, the identification of need, and mutual value satisfaction (Morgan and Hunt, 1994; Hawes et al., 1989; Swan et al., 1988). Buyers often attach intangible values to a product or service such as trust, which is relevant only to the satisfaction derived rather than product/service utility (Clawson and Vinson, 1978; Gutman and Vinson, 1979). Tangible needs influencing financial product acquisition have previously been studied (e.g. Foxall, 1994; Gunnarson and Wahlund, 1997; Linqvist, 1981; Lunt, 1996; Wrneryd, 1989, 1999a, 1999b) and findings generally suggest that most buyers commence transactional

24

interactions aiming to satisfy only one [perceived] particular [tangible] need; and it is the sellers alignment of elements such as competence and conduct with the buyer that determines whether a single closed or open relational transaction is the outcome. 3.7.1 Creating trust The Chambers dictionary (1994) definition of trust, in the context of relationship selling, can be summarised as: worthiness of being relied on; fidelity; confident expectation; a resting on the integrity; or anything felt to impose moral obligations. Trust can be classified as an intangible: not tangible or perceptible to touch; insubstantial; and eluding the grasp of the mind. Trust has been defined in various ways: "as a willingness to rely on an exchange partner in whom one has confidence" (Moorman et al., 1992); and as "the belief that a partner's word or promise is reliable and the party will fulfill his/her obligations in the relationship" (Schurr and Ozanne, 1985). Swan and Nolan (1985) identify three stages in the development of trust. In the first stage, trust is minimal since buyer and seller have yet to know each other, so their behaviour is largely based upon first impressions. In the second stage, once information exchanges have occurred, a fractional trust commences, based on the buyers perception of the sellers competence. Trust is established in the third stage through persuasion and negotiation processes, where the perceived performance matches the promised performance. Relationship selling behaviour focuses on mutual benefit, which establishes a stronger relationship leading to lower client turnover (Crosby and Cowles, 1990), a reduction in buyer perceived risk (Dabholkar et al., 1994; Moorman et al., 1992) and more referrals (Boles et al, 1997). 3.7.2 Identifying need The Chambers dictionary (1994) definition of need can be summarised as: the lack of something which one cannot well do without; necessity; a state that requires relief, to want; to require or be obliged [to do something]. Need can be classified as a tangible: perceptible to the touch; capable of being possessed or realised; material; corporeal.

25

Verhallen et al, (1997) argue that relationship selling necessitates a problem-solving approach, and therefore has to be based on determining the specific needs of the buyer. Such an approach can increase buyer motivation to participate (Bowen and Schneider, 1984); and once a mobilising need is identified, the seller can more easily customise the product or service to meet that need (Peppers and Rogers, 1999), particularly for financial services (Belth, 1973). Identifying buyer needs quickly requires that the seller probe the buyer intelligently and swiftly process the gathered buyer characteristics, information, preferences and priorities (Ainscough et al, 1996). 3.7.3 Delivering value satisfaction The Chambers dictionary (1994) definition of satisfaction [to satisfy], in the context of relationship selling, can be summarised as: contentment; gratification; comfort; to supply fully; to fulfill the conditions of; to meet the requirements of; to make content; to free from doubt; to convince. Satisfaction can be categorised as both tangible and intangible because participants are seeking value from a long-term relationship [intangible] founded on performance delivery [tangible] from the product or service. Long-standing literature indicates the importance of anticipated satisfaction prior to consumption (e.g. Bentham, 1789; Lowenstein, 1987; Marshall, 1891). The widespread confirmation/disconfirmation paradigm (Oliver, 1980) and alternates such as; contrast theory (Cardozo, 1965); assimilation theory (Anderson, 1973); equity theory (Swan and Mercer, 1981; Oliver and Swan, 1989a, 1989b) are arguably limited on three main issues: assumed consumer rationality; inadequate consideration of emotions as satisfaction forms; and excessive emphasis on the post-purchase phase for sustaining satisfaction. This suggests that satisfaction is an amorphous issue of complexity in the context of the value that it represents to participants; and understanding value satisfaction as a mechanism therefore requires the exploration of tangible and intangible drivers. Woodruff et al. (1982) and Walters and Bergiel (1989) suggest that buyers can anticipate satisfaction beliefs [cognitive evaluations] and feelings [emotions]; with

26

buyers deriving satisfaction benefits and value from services as a result of participating in the interactive experience (Bateson, 1992). In the context of the purchase decision relating to needs and wants fulfillment, the most common interpretations imply that feelings of satisfaction result from realisation against expectation (Parker and Mathews, 2001); suggesting that the value satisfied represents the prerequisite for successful selling processes. Organisations recognising this as an opportunity rather than threat will generally be more successful (Moss and Richardson, 1985). We can argue therefore that the dynamic interaction of both trust [intangible] and need [tangible] directly influence and determine the degree of value satisfaction perceived by the buyer [a profitable transaction for the seller and a beneficial transaction for the buyer]. This suggests that the prerequisite for a successful transactional outcome is high levels of trust and need. However, it is realistic to believe that a successful outcome could still be realised if either trust or need was low in relation to the other. In that event, the likelihood of repeat-buying in the future is less likely than if both trust and need were high (La Barbera and Mazursky, 1983). 3.7.4 Adaptive selling Literature has studied the importance of adapting sales process content in line with perceived information about the sales situation (Weitz et al., 1986; Weitz and Wright, 1978) and is more important still when considered against the longer-term lifetime value of a buyer; against that of viewing buyers as simply sales transactions (Dwyer et al., 1987; Ganesan, 1994). Furthermore, additional research has demonstrated that effectiveness in one-to-one selling is substantially enhanced by adapting each presentation to align with the specific behavioural characteristics of the buyer, as observed by the seller (Blake, 1995; Levy and Sharma, 1994; Weitz, 1981; Dion and Notarantonio, 1992; Goolsby et al., 1992; Miles et al., 1990; Anderson, 1991; Alessandra et al., 1987; Churchill et al., 1975).

27

The Perception Framework

Here we construct The Perception Framework (fig2.5) which establishes and defines the principles and structure for this research programme; by exploring the many degrees of trust and varieties of need that may be exhibited by transactional parties; and so determine the scale of value satisfaction perceived by the buyer or perceived as being delivered by the seller. The Perception Framework objective is the construction of a replicable structure that: measures the dynamic degrees of tangible and intangible influences on transactional participants; establishes correlations between positive or negative transactional outcomes; and ultimately develops the guiding principles upon which a diagnostic tool can be designed, applied and evolved. As should now be plain from the previous sections, while the primary objective of both buyer and seller is to derive satisfaction through the value delivered from the transaction; the concept of predicting the outcome in one-to-one selling, whether relational or transactional oriented, would be nonsensical; particularly given the unpredictability of personal interactions between buyer and seller (2.1). It is realistic to say therefore that the closest we might likely get to the perfect sales process is to deploy a relationship development process (3.0) that empowers the seller to better adapt each presentation in line with observations perceived, and so more closely align with the buyer (3.7.4). The scope of the issues and barriers identified in this study, The Perception Framework development process, and the resulting focus of buyer and seller questions is founded upon the existing relationship selling practices of the author evolved over some 18 years in a direct selling role in the financial service sectors of the UK and internationally; producing prospect to client conversion rates that exceed 85%; and where 100% of prospects have been referral generated for almost all of those years. It is therefore reasonable to argue that the relationship selling methodologies of the author can be seen as representing close alignment of the seller with how buyers prefer to buy; and as such can define the parameters of relationship selling in this study as a direct comparison to incumbent sales methodologies.

28

4.1

The function of The Perception Framework

Its function is to manage the design process for quantitative data collection; reduce the risk of contextual duplication in the questionnaires; ensure that the differential between tangible and intangible drivers is maintained from layer to layer; and ensure close correlations between buyer and seller questions. Its functional objective is to formulate a structure for the desired diagnostic tool that can be: replicable; valid; provide capacities for precision [present and future]; and has potential generalisability.

4.2

Defining The Perception Framework construction parameters

From past personal experience, the most appropriate approach to qualifying how buyers prefer to buy is to examine how they do not want to buy, on the premise that if the seller can avoid these barriers and issues, the seller will be behaving in a manner that is more attractive or aligned with the way the buyer does prefer to buy. In this context, and taking into account the identification of trust and need as the primary influences on value satisfaction as an outcome; the following should be considered as the primary buying barriers that need to be addressed by the seller in order to better influence the transactional outcome: The buyer wants the comfort of knowing that the seller has the best interests of the buyer in mind (Symanski, 1988: Lagace et al, 1991; Whalen et al, 1991) The buyer wants to be sure that the seller has sufficient competence for the task at hand (Rich and Smith, 2000; Leong et al., 1989; Szymanski and Churchill, 1990; Ainscough et al, 1996). The buyer wants to be sure that the solution [features] offered is the most appropriate for their circumstances (Derleda and Grzelak, 1982; Verhallen et al, 1997; Belth, 1973) The buyer wants to be sure that the sales methods used by the seller to motivate the buyer be based on need; rather than solely desire or consequence (Ainscough et al, 1996; Jolson, 1997; Hawrysh and Zaichkowsky, 1989) Naturally there are many other barriers in relation to the sales transaction. However, these can all be categorised as being related to one of the above. What is noticeable about these barriers is that the first two are related to trust and the latter two

29

Table4.0: How the buyer wants to do business

Quadrants Tangible (see) Intangible (feel) Determinators

related

to

need;

with

comfort and motivation intangible drivers; and competence and solution tangible take of the any drivers. This of by the between suggests that we can

Comfort

Reliability What approach methods the buyer would prefer Skills What conduct the buyer wants the seller to exhibit Promise What the buyer wants to buy Consequence What sales techniques the buyer would prefer to see used?

Image How the buyer would like the seller to be motivated Conduct How dependable the buyer wants the seller to be Acceptability How the buyer wants to buy Desire How the buyer would like to be persuaded to make a commitment to buy

Motive Commentary Behaviour Awareness Technical Inter-personal Ethics Performance Features Personality Feasibility Utility Insecurity Possession Compromise Necessity

Competence

approach barrier

Solution

determining the impact measuring interaction

Motivation

tangible and intangible drivers, and then apply this approach at many sub-levels (table4.0) as a means of determining the dynamic nature of interactive outcomes.

4.3

Identifying tangible and intangible drivers

At this exploratory stage, the choice of tangible and intangible drivers for each barrier/issue is a qualitative selection and relies largely upon the expertise of The Perception Framework user rather than research or study, since much depends upon the context of the transaction being explored. Once methodological recycling occurs, this can be modified as evaluation and application data becomes more developed. This linkage between tangible and intangible drivers enables the construction of a framework formulated from these discussions with which to better examine the factors influencing buying barriers, and thereby better construct the quantitative stage in this papers methodology. Having previously established that trust [intangible] and need [tangible] determine the degree of perceived value satisfaction (3.7.3), The Perception Framework (Appendix1) is constructed by considering which tangible and intangible influences primarily drive trust and need, which were identified in 4.2 as comfort [intangible] and competence [tangible] for trust; and solution [tangible] and motivation [intangible] for need. This second-layer of influence drivers is then itself explored deeper by considering which tangible and intangible influences primarily drive these second-layer drivers; generating a third-layer of tangible and intangible drivers [and so on exponentially down the perception chain].

30

4.4

Using The Perception Framework

Once the user decides on the number of layer-depths in The Perception Framework, and uniquely identifies each individual tangible and intangible driver at each layer, the subsequent lower-layer represents the construction of questions to be tabled in the questionnaire. Each separate question to respondents is oriented to either a tangible or intangible aspect of the identified unique driver at the immediate layer above the question-layer. As an example, this framework construction (Appendix1) allows the user to develop two questions related to motive; four questions related to image; eight questions related to comfort; 16 questions related to trust; and 32 questions related to value satisfaction. The mechanism of construction correlates disparate aspects related to tangible and intangible influences with each issue or barrier at variable levels of complexity. We can consider that the four drivers of trust and need identified in 4.2 represent the four quadrants in The Perception Framework; and subsequent barriers/issues are directly related to each of these (Appendix1); and it is the interaction of these quadrants that we need to explore through data collection so to better understand what drives how buyers prefer to buy; thereby determining seller effectiveness. Sub-quadrants for each of the four quadrants can also be defined; for example expertise [tangible] and integrity [intangible] for competence (Appendix1). Such partitioning helps further define the thrust of driver selections within each quadrant, and the focus and content of questions for the questionnaire.

4.5

Applications for The Perception Framework

The Perception Framework allows a considerable degree of detail to be realised when evaluating collected data, since it uses unique identities for each driver and as such allows the user to identify specific defects in the sales process in addition to grouping defects in the context of causality; and thereby enhancing organisational and individual diagnosis decisions The Perception Framework provides the capacity to extend the depth of data detail that can be collected; by descending through additional layers in each quadrant; and

31

each quadrant can be split into separate studies should a greater focus or understanding capabilities. It is the intention for this paper to only descend to eight questions for each quadrant [32 in total]; demonstrating The Perception Frameworks potential function as a study design and diagnostic tool; and thereby seeks resolution of the issues outlined in section1. be required in that direction; thereby enhancing evaluation

32

Data collection

Here we construct the questionnaires, using the principles and parameters developed through The Perception Framework, where the layers of tangible and intangible drivers uniquely identified (4.4) can now be explored and measured through data collection with participants. The objective of the questionnaires is to quantify the extent of seller alignment with buyer buying preferences; and ultimately provide the foundation for the desired diagnostic tool.

5.1

Building the questionnaires

As described (4.4) the Perception Framework is a mechanism for separating each uniquely identified issue or barrier into tangible and intangible aspects by using The Perception Framework as the questionnaire design tool; and in so doing orients respective questions appropriately, in the context of how the buyer prefers to do business against how the seller is doing business [or trying to do business] (table5.1a).
Table5.1a: Transactional conduction
How the seller is doing business Quadrant Tangible (see) Intangible (feel) Examines the sellers true orientation (Self or buyer or balanced) Examines how effective the sellers presentation skills are in front of the buyer Examines how flexible the sellers sales techniques being used are when presenting to the buyer Examines how effective the seller is at closing this type of sale Determinator Intangible (feel) Tangible (see) How the buyer prefers to do business

Comfort

Examines the sales approach/tactics the seller is prepared to use to accomplish the sale Establishes how effective organisational training programmes and mentoring is Establishes how high the quality of the sales being completed are

Motive Commentary Behaviour Awareness Technical Inter-personal Ethics Performance Features Personality Feasibility Utility Insecurity Possession Compromise Necessity

Examines how the buyer would like to be approached Examines how the buyer would like the seller to conduct himself Examines what the buyer wants to buy

Establishes how the buyer would like the seller to be motivated

Competence

Establishes how dependable the buyer wants the seller to be

Solution

Establishes how the buyer wants to buy Examines the manner in which the buyer would prefer to be persuaded to commit to buying

Motivation

Establishes the type of sales techniques the seller prefers to use

Establishes the type of sales techniques the buyer would prefer to see used

Table5.1a explores the seller perspective, accounting for the buyer perspectives described in table4.0; and demonstrates how the sales process should be examined. This perspective differential [at times opposing] means that elements such as competence [e.g. training and mentoring programmes] is a tangible driver for the seller, since it is capable of being possessed or realised (3.7); whereas this is an

33

intangible driver for the buyer; since the buyer has to perceive (3.7) the existence of the sellers competence. It is argued therefore that the buyers tangible and intangible drivers are reversed for the seller, in the context of exploring the interaction of cognitive and conative influences between buyer and seller as a diagnostic tool application. This realisation allows The Perception Framework user to orient the question focus more appropriately between buyers and sellers (table5.1b).
Table5.1b: Question orientation and focus
Question focus (seller) Tangible (see) Intangible (feel) Sales methods Press sentiment Closing tactics Buyer knowledge Understanding specifics Reasoning from objectives Solutions appropriate Solutions realistic Objective Consumer sentiment Reasoning Information selectivity Relevance understood Reasoning from needs Honest assessment Positives/negatives considered Explanation matches reasoning Style matches reasoning Solutions consider objectives Is realisation feasible Solution is urgent Intention is urgent Balanced need and desire Suitable Determinator Motive Commentary Behaviour Awareness Technical Inter-personal Ethics Performance Question focus (buyer) Intangible (see) Tangible (feel) Sales methods Press sentiment Closing tactics Buyer knowledge Understanding specifics Reasoning from objectives Solutions appropriate Solutions realistic Objective Consumer sentiment Reasoning Information selectivity Relevance understood Reasoning from needs Honest assessment Positives/negatives considered Explanation matches reasoning Style matches reasoning Solutions consider objectives Is realisation feasible Solution is urgent Intention is urgent Balanced need and desire Suitable

Comfort

Competence

Features match explanation Solution Style matches explanation Solutions consider resources Are expectations realistic Benefit cancels consequence Desire cancels caution Balanced cost and benefit Practical

Features Personality Feasibility Utility Insecurity Possession Compromise Necessity

Features match explanation Style matches explanation Solutions consider resources Are expectations realistic Benefit cancels consequence Desire cancels caution Balanced cost and benefit Practical

Motivation

A further significance of this realisation is that when using The Perception Framework [as a diagnostic tool] to remedy a buyers intangible barrier, the appropriate solution for the seller lies in seeking remediation on the equivalent tangible driver; or viceversa. An example here would be where a failed buyer might have preferred to see less coercive sales techniques utilised [intangible]; the seller therefore needs to examine and re-align behavioral skills/techniques [additional training: tangible] so that they are more motivational [rather than manipulative] and need-based [rather than desire or consequence based]. However, for the purpose of the questionnaires and data collection [the study], Appendix2 demonstrates that the issues are addressed by similar questions, but each need to consider the respective perspectives. In so doing, we can identify where the middle-ground is [buyer and seller alignment], and thus verify the focus for each question asked of a buyer or seller (table5.1b).

34

Having now identified the thrust of questions for each sample we can begin to design the actual questions, taking care to ensure that each are relevant to the issue at hand; clear and concise; not leading; and avoid bias; in order to obtain a quality response (Janes, 1999; Babbie 1990; Schwarz, 1999; Sudman et al, 1996); taking account of the following considerations when formulating the survey questions (Appendix3): To better reflect the nature of this study; avoid respondent confusion; and align responses with the seller questionnaire; seller was replaced with financial adviser to better focus the respondent on financial products In order to capture true variable responses and avoid simple yes and no responses, the phrases always and never were adopted wherever feasible on the principle that it would be unlikely that the respondent could answer 100% in the affirmative or negative, unless it was absolutely the case

The introductory phrase Do you think that buyers for seller questions was adopted on the principle that to gauge how a seller perceives their own effectiveness, the most effective way generally is to ask how they think others perceive them The phraseology for each question was oriented to elicit scaled agree/disagree responses A 6-level Likert scale was adopted to ensure that in the event of a neutral response, the respondent would have to select a positive or negative position of neutrality

5.2

Questionnaire testing

Formal testing of the questionnaires was not undertaken due to time and practicality constraints; and the consideration that each of the three Partners has previous experience in the UK of conducting sales and marketing surveys. As a consequence of internal discussions and observations relating to the questionnaire content prior to conducting the fieldwork, it was decided to add some additional questions [qualitative] that would give some insights into relationships emerging from the study; thereby provide some potential directions for modification in subsequent cycles.

35

For the seller questionnaire additional questions would relate to length of career experience and primary prospecting methods: Average career longevity Primary prospecting methodology Explore any relationship between responses and career longevity Explore any relationship between career longevity and prospecting methods

For the buyer questionnaire the additional questions would relate to the means of approach by the seller and repeat-buy likelihood: Repeat-buying intentions Approach methodology Explore any relationship between approach method and outcome Explore any relationship between approach method and repeat-buy potential

5.3

Fieldwork: Approach and methodology

Given the issues outlined in section1, respondents can only be accessed largely by face-to-face, telephone or self-administered (postal) surveys (Janes, 1999). In the case of self-administered surveys the risk of low response rates could put the entire study at risk and should therefore be avoided in this cycle. Telephone surveys were rejected as it was felt personal contact would increase the completion and response quality; particularly since respondents would be Asian and some questions might have to be culturally clarified to elicit a valid response, given the westernised prose (Appendix3). Therefore the research instrument selected was face-to-face surveys using questionnaires. The objective of this study is to determine; firstly how buyers prefer to buy; and secondly the degree of alignment or misalignment of the seller with the buyer. Samples will be required from buyers, failed buyers, and sellers [agents]. The first sample aims to identify causes of failure; the second to identify causes of successful transactions and provide differential indications between failed and successful sales transactions; and the third to identify agent sales practices such as: closing tactics employed; agent orientations; prospecting methods etc.

36

The data collection objective is to generate quantitative [variables] and qualitative data [cases] for the purpose of constructing a qualitative evaluation of the study objectives using cluster analysis framed as trust/need matrixes to determine the perceived level of transactional value satisfaction. There will no doubt be an opportunity to statistically analyse the variable data [reliability, factor, correlation, regression etc] but any significant findings in this regard are seen as being pertinent largely to the second and subsequent research cycles in terms of modification needs; rather than this study.

5.4

Respondent targeting

It is generally accepted in literature that any developed measuring instrument should be targeted at those for whom the instrument is intended (Churchill, 1995). Since this study has focused on measuring the interaction between trust and need to determine value satisfaction, in the context of relationship selling, the ideal study participants to be examined will be real buyers [failed or not] who make the final purchase decision; and real practitioners who execute the sales process [effectively or not]. Since this study also seeks to measure the perception of those participants who are or have been involved directly in a relationship selling transaction [recognised as such or not], it is most suitable to survey these participants at the personal level. In Asia, it is generally accepted that the man manages the household finances, and makes most financial decisions with or without his partners consent. Furthermore, and particularly in Singapore due to the high cost of housing, financial independence [from the parents] does not usually occur until the child has left home, and this is often not until age 25-35 [upon marriage]; and it is normal for most single males aged lower than 30 to involve their father in any financial decision such as life assurance and investment. Since we will be seeking respondents who make their own financial decisions; and therefore better able to relate the cause and basis of a positive or negative outcome; males or couples in the age group 35-50 [determined by visual observation] will be targeted. By seeking multiple sample types [buyer and seller], it was decided that it would be more practical to attempt to gather data where buyers, failed buyers and agents might be accessible at the same location. In Singapore, most primary office

37

complexes have integral medium-large shopping malls; and it was decided that it would be more practical to target office/mall complexes where incumbent life assurance companies had offices and in so doing access buyers, failed buyers, and agents without needing to shift location. This approach did represent some issues in terms of which daytime hours would be most appropriate for each type of sample; and it was decided to seek agent respondents during lunch [12am 2pm] and buyers in the morning [10am 12am] and afternoon [2pm 4pm]. In determining which days were best for conducting the surveys, consideration was given to the fact that many agents do not visit their offices over the weekend; and during weekdays would either be in training meetings [am] or out on appointments [pm]. However, agents are no different to other sector workers in that they take lunch during the day, and often in small groups; which might assist data gathering in terms of multiple surveys being conducted to small groups concurrently; and therefore lunchtime was deemed the most suitable time of the day to sample agents. Consideration was given to the likelihood that buyers might be accompanied by children at weekends, with the consequent negative impact to response and completion rates [distraction]. However, during weekdays, we could expect a much higher preponderance of single adults rather than couples, and this would affect the volume of suitable respondents, given that the survey intends to target males and couples. It was decided that weekdays offered the superior choice between the two options.

5.5

Respondent selection

Fig5.6: survey screening process

Are you a financial adviser? No Have you sat down with a financial adviser in the last 12 months? Yes Did you buy a financial product from that financial adviser? Yes Complete the successful buy questionnaire Complete the seller questionnaire

Taking into account that three separate types of samples would be sought, it was decided that some form of screening (fig5.6) would be necessary prior to questionnaire commencement, so ensuring correct questionnaire completion. Respondent sampling would largely be by way of opportunistic selection of
Yes

No

Do not complete questionnaire No Did that financial adviser present a product brochure to you? Yes

No

Complete the failed buy questionnaire

38

targets using a loosely randomised process (Peterson, 1988). Due to the constraints previously described, and the likelihood that a good proportion of targets stopped would not be suitable respondents, a true randomised approach might defeat the data collection objective (Korbel and Bell, 1985). Therefore it was decided that, given the studys exploratory nature, any selection bias is unlikely to be a significant issue for this first cycle.

5.6

Survey experiences

The fieldwork data collection lasted 3 consecutive days in September 2002 and produced 58 buyer samples [17 buyers; 41 failed buyers] and 20 agent samples; from 354 targets screened; representing a valid response rate of almost 4.54:1 for suitable buyer or agent respondents; which was less than expected. There were 47 [13.3%] refusals by targets to undertake the screening, generally occurring in small clusters rather then an even distribution throughout the day; and was a lower rate than expected. An average of 1:2.3 buyers did seek [directly or deemed necessary through observation] clarification of question context on at least one question. The study locations for each of the three days were different office/shopping complexes in Singapore where Insurance Companies are known to have offices. Selection of target respondents was based on business attire for agents and males/couples perceived by observation to be within the target age group. The researchers location was generally located in the region of primary entry points; adjacent to office lobbies during agent targeting periods; and adjacent to mall entrances during buyer targeting periods.

5.7

Study limitations

The most logical source for buyer and seller information, in the context of effectiveness, is from existing staff and clients (Chonko et al., 1991; Webster, 1965). However, since the organisation is not presently a market participant, it is not feasible to seek respondents who are already clients with which to determine how they would have preferred to have bought; or analyse existing staff sales practices.

39

Given the cyclical nature of the study methodology it was realised that modification through evaluation and application would effectively provide an evolving test mechanism with each cycle through theorisation and re-conceptualisation. For this exploratory study it was decided the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software package would not be considered as an element in the design of the questionnaires as this could introduce potential preconceptions to The Perception Framework phase of the methodology (Bigus et al, 1994) in the context of skewing the study inadvertently in favour of quantitative data, thereby putting at risk the methodological process for this exploratory stage; and the eventual goal of building a learning organisation through a continuous programme of research (Teare, 1998). This issue would be reassessed during the second and subsequent cycles. It was recognised early in the questionnaire design phase that there would likely be a requirement to contextualise some questions for respondents in order to attain useable completions, due to variations in cultural context between the researcher [western] and the respondent [Asian]. It is therefore realistic to expect that there will be some impact on data quality, in the context of differential reliability between buyer and seller questionnaire performance. For the seller questionnaire, it is expected that there will be little need for contextual assistance with respondents, despite cultural differences, due to standardised terminologies within the financial services industry around the World and the Americanised training systems in this market (3.4). This issue was considered throughout the question design phase, but the degree of impact will only become evident through fieldwork; and necessary remediation applied in subsequent cycles. Given this real issue it was decided to split the buyer questionnaire into successful buy and failed buy questionnaires since phraseology would make respondent understanding [where a sale had failed] more difficult by using context more appropriate for successful buyers [and visa versa]; with this adjustment/segregation in contextual approach likely increasing higher quality responses from each buyer type. Since this stage represents an exploratory venture into the subject at hand, in the context of theorisation, lower sample quantities were deemed acceptable, since substantial modification is expected in subsequent research cycles.

40

It was decided that buyer respondents would be screened on the basis of having experienced a financial services sales presentation within only the last 12 months. It was felt that the capacity for any buyer to provide quality responses on an incident that occurred more than 12 months prior to the survey [successful or otherwise] would likely skew the resulting data quality due to inconsistencies in recall capacity; particularly given the complexity of the questionnaire. The Perception Framework does represent a highly complex interaction of variables, which will make statistical analysis more of a challenge through subsequent recycling and modification. It is for this reason, in terms of practical application for the expected diagnostic tool; that the layer depth was limited to a total of 32 questions. This question limitation also represented what was perceived as being the reasonable limit for opportunity questionnaires sought during a respondents lunch-hour. It is unclear at this exploratory stage whether there are additional variables that have not been considered or accounted for in the conceptualisation for this study. Only in the evaluation, application, and recycling can any unknowns be identified or examined.

41

Evaluation of findings

Here we evaluate the data collected through the questionnaires developed from the principles established by The Perception Framework, as the fourth-step in the research methodology adopted (2.5). The objective of this evaluation is to commence the recycling process of validating the previous methodology steps against developing data to ensure replicability and precision; for subsequent cycles; and in the design and application of the desired diagnostic tool. The functional objective of this fourth-step is to evaluate the degree of seller alignment with buyer buying preferences, determined by the interaction between trust and need, in the context of value satisfaction as an outcome (section3); so that these measures can form the basis of future research and business application; using cluster analysis and a customised evaluation matrix as the evaluation mechanisms. Given the many variables delivered by The Perception Framework (Appendix1); and the proposal that each variable represents one of two states [tangible or intangible] it was decided that the most appropriate manner of measurement would be to take the total mean values for each variable in a data set, and combine them as a sum total in relation to quadrant location. For example, in both data sets; the sum of the mean value of all tangible and intangible questions 1 through 8 would now represent trust, and all tangible and intangible questions 9 through 16 would now represent need. This approach allows the full dynamic nature of multiple layers of tangible and intangible driver interactions to be measured; on the premise that this approach is more likely to duplicate what occurs in real life; producing a more realistic determination of the dynamics at work; and identifying any significant relationships between variables; and between variables and cases. Since The Perception Framework and questionnaires are unproven in terms of their utilisation, a qualitative evaluation approach was selected (5.3) on the premise that this would provide greater interpretive flexibility at this exploratory stage; and would better aid the reconceptualisation stage for the next cycle. It is anticipated that future and subsequent cycles will drift toward a more balanced qualitative and

42

quantitative evaluation methodology, considering the research methodology adopted (Fig2.5) and future remedies to study limitations (5.4). Quantitative data was entered into the SPSS system as variables, and qualitative data as cases; with respective values attributed using the 6-level Likert scale adopted (5.1); with the range of score attributed for each case and variable determined by each sample respondent. Samples were divided into two data sets upon entry: buyers and sellers. For the buyer data set, SPSS statistical analysis was undertaken: reliability analysis [method 2: covariance matrix] used trust and need as independent variables and outcome as the dependent variable; and regression analysis used independent variables [trust and need] and cases [outcome, approach methods and repeat-buy] as dependent variables. Descriptive statistics are summarised in Appendix4. For the seller data set (Appendix5), SPSS statistical analysis was undertaken: reliability analysis [method 2: covariance matrix] used trust and need as independent variables and outcome as the dependent variable; and regression analysis used independent variables [trust and need] and cases [prospecting methods and career longevity] as dependent variables. Descriptive statistics are summarised in Appendix5.

6.1

Evaluation matrix

Since the study objective is to determine the interactional dynamics between buyers and sellers, in relation to value satisfied as an outcome in relationship development; it can be argued that value satisfaction as a consequent outcome will either exist or not exist, in the context of there being a sufficient or insufficient level of satisfaction for the outcome to be positive. In the literature reviewed as part of this study (section3), it is apparent that other states of value satisfaction can exist (Dyer, 1998; Crosby and Stevens, 1987: La Barbera and Mazursky, 1983; Newman and Werbal, 1973; Oliver and Linda, 1981).

43

In the participative process of constructing The Perception Framework (section4), it became apparent that all factors influencing the interactional environment could be described as either tangible or intangible. In light of the evolutionary nature of the adopted research methodology (2.5); recognising that additional states of value satisfaction exist; and acceptance that two states of interactional influence exist; we can now summarise relational outcomes using an emergent hypothesis: H1 That the interaction of need and trust between buyer and seller determines the relational outcome: H1a H1b H1c If need is high and trust is high; then the interactional outcome is relational based If need is low and trust is low; then the interactional outcome is a failed transaction If need is high and trust is low; then the interactional outcome is determined by the product/service features offered by the seller; and the interactional outcome is transactional based H1d If need is low and trust is high; then the interactional outcome is determined by the personality of the seller; and the interactional outcome is collaborative based Hypothesis1 demonstrates that a successful sale can still be the transactional outcome even if either need or trust is not high (Fig6.1a). In these instances, the likelihood trust and need were high (La Barbera and Mazursky, 1983). This also supports the argument that seller personality and the product/service features offered are directly related to the value satisfied and the
L L Need

Fig6.1a: Evaluation matrix

H Transactional Based

Relational Based

of repeat sales in the future are less likely than if both

Failed Transaction

Collaborative Based

Trust

transactional outcome, in the context of selling practices and styles (Graham and Sano, 1984; Van Zandt, 1970; Glenn et al, 1977; Hawrysh and Zaichkowsky, 1989); and can be categorised, in the context of transactional interactions, as the sales process utilised by the seller to influence the transactional outcome.

44

Fig6.1b: Function based

H

functional

style

selling

process

focuses

upon

establishing a reason to buy based on features and

Features Based Trust

utility, and the successful outcome is dependent upon the competence exhibited by the seller [tangible] and the degree of comfort [intangible] the buyer perceives

Competence

Distrust

Personality Based

throughout the transaction; in relation to the degree of the buyers trust in the seller, as an outcome in relationship development. This selling style or

Comfort

practice is often used to sell lower cost items [commodity-like] such as insurance, banking, household products, grocery etc. We can summarise this function-based sales process (fig6.1b) in the context of transactional outcomes as emergent hypotheses2; [a direct contributant to hypothesis1]: H2 That the interaction of seller competence and buyer comfort determines the extent of trust as an interactional outcome of the sales process utilised: H2a H2b H2c If competence is high and comfort is high; then the interactional outcome is trust based If competence is low and comfort is low; then the interactional outcome is distrust If competence is high and comfort is low; then the interactional outcome is determined by the product/service features offered by the seller; and the interactional outcome is features based H2d If competence is low and comfort is high; then the interactional outcome is determined by the personality of the seller; and the interactional outcome is personality based An emotive selling style focuses on establishing

Fig6.1c: Emotive based

H

emotional reasons to buy such as desire or greed using consequence or coercive tactics; where the the solution proposed by the seller in relation to the buyers circumstances, and the means of motivation used by the seller to mobilise the buyer; in relation to the extent of the buyer need established by the seller successful outcome is dependent upon the feasibility of

Insecurity Solution

Need

Unnecessary

Possession

Motivation

as an outcome in relationship development. This selling style is often used to sell

45

high ticket items such as collectables, luxury/sports cars, life assurance etc. We can summarise this emotive-based sales process (fig6.1c) in the context of transactional outcomes, as emergent hypotheses3 [a direct contributant to hypothesis1]: H3 That the interaction of the sellers offered solution and motivational tactics used on the buyer determines the extent of need as an interactional outcome from the sales process: H3a H3b H3c If solution is high and motivation is high; then the interactional outcome is need based If solution is low and motivation is low; then the interactional outcome is unnecessary If solution is high and motivation is low; then the interactional outcome is determined by the degree of buyer disturbance elicited by the seller; and the interactional outcome is insecurity based H3d If solution is low and motivation is high; then the interactional outcome is determined by the degree of buyer desire elicited by the seller; and the interactional outcome is possession based When using this evaluation matrix to test cases and variables, an arbitrary mid delineation value (45) between the quadrants has been selected, on the assumed expectation that the interaction between the quadrants is equal.

6.2 SPSS

Discussion: buyer data cluster statistical analysis using the

The collected buyer data was inputted into evaluation matrix (fig6.1a) as the construct to measure quantitative variables against each qualitative case to determine emergent relationships. As is visually apparent (fig6.2a), there is a distinct relationship in terms of transactional outcome between trust and need. Positive transactional outcomes are all positioned in the relational based quadrant, and

Fig6.2a: Buyer outcome

there is a distinctive visual separation between positive and negative outcomes, thus confirming hypothesis1. However, the positioning of positive transactional outcomes

46

does

suggest

that

all

the

outcomes

are

relational

based

only,

suggesting

disconfirmation that other value satisfaction states exist (6.1); and disconfirming hypothesis2 and hypothesis3. Furthermore, negative outcomes are positioned in all four quadrants, suggesting disconfirmation of hypothsis1, but at the same time confirming hypothesis2 and hypothesis3. This finding has several implications, since we have multiple contradictions emerging from the cluster analysis while hypothesis2 and hypothesis3 were postulated as directly contributing to hypothesis1, and should therefore be aligned and supportive. Furthermore, the positioning of negative transactional outcomes on the matrix suggests that a successful outcome occurred when clearly [according to the samples] it did not. The causality from these contradictions is postulated as being: o That there exists a fifth dimension to the matrix, as visualised in fig6.2a by the addition of the square added to represent the possible location of such a 5th State; or o o That the arbitrary delineation position selected (6.1) is incorrect; or That the emergent hypotheses are disconfirmed.

In examining the additional 5th State square added to fig6.2a to test this issue, it was arbitrarily assumed that this 5th State be scaled in a similar manner to the arbitrary delineation already applied on the premise that any 5th State identified would need to include each of the four quadrants in its range; and that it should also include most of the negative transactional
Fig6.2b: Buyer outcome

outcome clusters positioned in the positive outcome quadrants; thereby determining the x-axis and y-axis ranges for the 5th State. The above evaluation does not provide any reasonable explanation for negative outcomes positioned in positive outcome quadrants. However, by shifting the arbitrary quadrant delineations (fig6.2b)

we can see an immediate separation of positive and negative transactional outcomes that do now support hypothesis1, hypothesis2 and hypothesis3. Furthermore,

47

positive outcomes are now separated by their interactional basiss, adding further support to hypothesis2 and hypothesis3; and confirming that the selected arbitrary matrix delineation was positioned incorrectly; and would consequently have skewed the current data findings, likely to the point of invalidating the entire study in this cycle. Therefore, it is necessary to adopt this delineation shift in order to make any further study meaningful for this cycle. If we were to build a sub-matrix in the no sale quadrant as illustrated by the dotted green line in fig6.2b [scaled to the modified matrix delineation]; we can see that a large proportion of failed transactions are positioned in the upper right sub-quadrant. It could therefore be postulated that the primary cause of transactional failure is relationship development failure, as a
Fig6.2c: Approach methodology

consequent failure of the function (fig6.1b) or emotive (fig6.1c) based sales process. To ensure that the adoption of the new quadrant delineation is a reasonable adjustment for further evaluation of the data being measured in this cycle, the delineation shift was further tested against the SPSS cluster analysis of: method of approach against need and trust.

When considering the correlation between transactional outcome and approach method (fig6.2c) it is difficult to see any significant pattern emerging between the two in terms of whether the method of approach used by the seller has any significant influence over the transactional outcome. Personal experience, logic and literature research (section3) suggest that significant influence from method of approach on outcome should and does exist in this context. Once the quadrant delineation shift is applied (fig6.2d) a vastly clearer picture emerges which confirms a clear correlation between seller approach methodology and transactional outcome; and that cold calling [by far the dominant method utilised in Singapore according to the data] has a clear correlation with transactional failure. We can also see that approach methods such as referral deliver a superior level of value satisfaction, and produced a positive transactional outcome in all cases. With just four recorded

48

instances of referral generated outcome, this is clearly not a sufficient quantity to reach a conclusion in this regard. However, the lack of referral-based samples does support the premise of cold-calling as the dominant methodology in the market. A clear correlation between approach

Fig6.2d: Seller approach

methodology and repeat-buy intention, in the context of relational outcome can be seen in Fig6.2e; and where trust and need outcomes are high; the likelihood of repeatbuying is higher. This finding supports the study contention and that long-term are relationships value satisfaction

contingent on good trust and need values; and verifies La Barbera and Mazursky, (1983) contentions that where these values are low or lacking, the likelihood of repeat-buying is low. We can also see that all negative responses are positioned in the collaborative based quadrant. While the sample volume is too small to be conclusive, it does support hypothesis2 in that the findings indicate the primary sales methods employed in the market are collaborative [personality] based.
Fig6.2e: Repeat-buying intentions

It should be noted that had the quadrant delineations not been shifted (fig6.2e), the entire sample positions would be in the relational outcome quadrant, suggesting that all the transactional outcomes sampled were relational based in the context of repeat-buying; to repeat-buy. These findings suggest the existence of a clear relationship between seller approach methods, the value satisfied by the transaction, and repeat buying intentions; and where the values of each of these factors are high, a long-term relationship is established by the seller with the buyer; representing the attainment of competitive advantage over future competitors by that seller with that buyer. but contradicted by respondents indicating negative intentions

49

6.3

Discussion: seller data

Fig6.3a: Prospecting methodology

The collected seller data was inputted into the SPSS clustering statistical analysis using the evaluation matrix (fig6.1a) as the construct to measure qualitative quantitative case to variables against each determine emergent

relationships. The delineation modification (6.2) has been applied in the approach to seller cluster evaluation. As is visually evident in Fig6.3a, there is a distinct relationship between prospecting methods and value satisfaction perceived as being delivered to buyers by the seller. We can also see a distinct differential between the types of prospecting method utilised and sales processes, supporting the postulation that sales methodologies are predominantly collaborative based (6.2). These findings suggest the existence of a clear relationship between career longevity, prospecting methodology utilised,
Fig6.3b: Career longevity

and value satisfaction perceived as being delivered by the seller to the buyer; and where the values of each of these factors is high, the seller has been better aligned with the buying preferences a higher that of the buyer; of a representing higher likelihood a

successful transactional outcome; and a likelihood is long-term the relationship established between

seller and buyer. 6.4 Discussion of findings

The study findings have certainly provided a clear indication that selling practices are not aligned with the way buyers would prefer to buy (fig6.4), substantiated by the generally low levels of value satisfaction found in the sampled data. While it is plain that the number of samples collected is certainly insufficient to deliver substantive conclusions; this exploratory study does indicate a substantial proportion of sales

50

presentations fail because they are unable to deliver sufficient value satisfaction to the buyer that is capable of developing and supporting a relationship of sufficient strength with which to mobilise the prospective buyer to buy (fig6.2b).
Fig6.4: Measuring buyer/seller alignment

As has been postulated, the degree a direct of misalignment with between buyer and seller has correlation transactional outcomes; and the wider this gap, the higher the incidence of transactional failures (fig6.2b). [across Fig6.4 both demonstrates

data sets] the extent of the gap between perceived value satisfaction experienced by the buyer, and the value satisfaction perceived as delivered by the seller; where alignment would be categorised as representing the maximum mean value of 24 for each variable. The dominant mean values (6.4) indicate that buyers perceive the sales process as desire-based, and sellers perceive the sales process as promise-based; further supporting the finding that predominant sales practices are collaborative (fig6.1a), using coercive (fig6.1c) rather than functional (fig6.1b) sales methodology. The influence of need and trust on the transactional outcome was believed to be equal (6.1). The shift in matrix delineation (6.2) does strongly indicate that the interactional influence of trust and need on the transactional outcome is in fact not equal; and that need [conative] has a greater influence than trust [cognitive] over the transactional outcome; thus supporting earlier postulations. This is further supported by the preponderance of satisfaction outcomes (fig6.2b) positioned below the modified need-axis [only 7 samples above it]; whereas 16 samples exceed the modified trust-axis; indicating that many buyers perceived that their trust in the seller exceeded their need for the sellers product/service; and that most agents perceived that buyers had a low need for the product/service they were offering. These negative perceptions further support the postulation that the primary sales methodology in use is collaborative based; and indicate that sellers lack the capacity

51

to identify appropriate buyer needs and communicate effectively with the buyer; and consequently, transactional failures are more frequently the transactional outcome than successful transactions. The dominance of cold call methodology (fig6.2d; fig6.3a) in relation to satisfaction outcomes indicates that the task of developing relationships toward a successful transactional outcome is made much harder for the seller; particularly if the seller is less experienced (fig6.3b). Given that 60% of the positive outcome positions can be considered collaboratively based (fig6.1a), seller competences appear lacking, particularly if you consider that only one positive outcome is transactional based [requires higher competency]; and taken together with low relational based outcomes and low positive repeat-buying intentions; we can see a pattern emerging that suggests that incumbent training and mentoring programmes lack an awareness or orientation toward relationship selling in this market; and instead appear to be focused on immediate economic outcomes. What is particularly revealing from the samples is that both need and trust measures are relatively low; where higher measures for each of these would have been expected for successful transactional outcomes. This supports the assertion (section1) that sellers in this market exhibit hard-selling sales practices and tactics, with the consequence that buyers perceive this as confirmation that the seller is motivated by their own interests rather than those of the buyer. However, it does appear that this orientation begins to reverse itself progressively in line with career longevity (Fig6.3b) as the seller develops alternative sales and approach mechanisms that allow improved capacity for the seller to be better aligned with the buyer (fig6.3a). The study findings do represent a very strong indication that our existing relationship selling practices and referral centric approach methodologies can deliver a palpable differentiation in buyer experiences in comparison to the hard-selling sales tactics and approach methods predominantly in use by incumbent sellers; and thus support our competitive goal of professional leadership (section1). Additionally, The Perception Frameworks delivered from this study should now allow the development of management tools that will enable the measurement of both client satisfaction and determine the effectiveness of the sales processes utilised by individual

52

representatives; thus reducing the competitive risks and constraints in human resource investment. This study has identified a significant differential in seller competency when related to career longevity, and as such staff selection procedures should be restricted to applicants with a minimum of 24 months or more experience on the premise that their perception of the value satisfaction they deliver to buyers demonstrates a better orientation toward the buyers best interests than less experienced sellers; and as such will make the task of retraining more effective; consequently representing lower investment risk. Furthermore, The Perception Framework generated from this study will enable the development of superior selection processing tools that can further reduce the risk of recruitment errors through applicant testing. While the data collection objective was to qualitatively evaluate the study objectives (5.3), some preliminary statistical analysis was conducted on The Perception Framework variables collected, largely for the purpose of data record keeping for future study cycles, and consequently was not included with this paper. However, it is interesting to note that that a preliminary statistical factor analysis of The Perception Framework variables using SPSS generated three factors [rather than the anticipated two] when measuring tangible and intangible driver responses in The Perception Framework. While the significance of this measure is difficult to quantify at such an early stage of exploration; two possible explanations are postulated: 1. That there exists a third component in the interactive relationship between tangible and intangible drivers. Whether this third component represents an input or output is unclear, given the current low data volume. However, present conjecture postulates that this third component represents the outcome value from the two inputted variables, and determines the value to be inputted into the next layer of higher interaction (Appendix1). 2. That a third primary variable has been omitted in the construction of The Perception Framework. Literature would argue that this third component represents an environmental or other external factor (e.g. Crosby et al, 1990; Churchill et al, 1985; Walker et al, 1977). However, as has previously been postulated in this study, influences upon buyer/seller behaviours can be classified as comprising only an intangible or tangible factor; and this is no different for say

53

the transactional environment [e.g. a buyers home] where any environmental influence could be described as an intangible [e.g. ambience, mood etc] or a tangible [e.g. furnishings, cleanliness etc]. Each of these can be generically described as an environmental condition [tangible] or influence [intangible] that determine buyer/seller perceptions. Consequently it is argued that this second explanation is a less feasible resolution. It will be the task of successive study cycles to modify and develop emerging management tools by broadening data depth from research based inputs and application data sampling (Fig2.5); thereby enabling this organisation to better adapt with regulatory, market and competitive changes; whilst maintaining its differentiated competitive strategy of professional leadership through innovative practices. 6.5 Critique of the study

This study set out with the objective of developing management tools that would allow this organisation to be more effective in the market by better aligning sales practices with buyer preferences. It also set out with the clear intention that the research and development would be a cyclical process rather than a linear one. The findings in this exploratory study do confirm the wisdom in having adopted this approach; even if for the moment we disregard the small sample size captured. Certainly, given the many study limitations recognised and described in 5.4, this study could only be described as being an exploratory one; where successive cycles can address many of these limitations, and any impact on the study as a whole should quickly be diluted as expanded data depth is captured. The avoidance in employing the SPSS system as part of the initial design process meant that risks from skewed data were higher than they would otherwise have been, as demonstrated by the need to shift the evaluation matrix points of delineation (6.2). Certainly this analytical omission meant that The Perception Framework could not be effectively tested prior to deployment; with the consequence that some buyer respondents had to be assisted with contextual understanding; and the erroneous [suspected] factor analysis outputs (Appendix6) when The Perception Framework was itself informally statistically tested for record purposes (6.4). On the other hand, the quality of the qualitative evaluation outputs have enabled a much

54

clearer understanding of what buyers are actually experiencing from the sales processes being utilised (fig6.4), and how sellers perceive the effectiveness of those sales practices; with the consequence that the second cycle will be better able to explore buying preferences and seller capabilities in subsequent cycles. It might have been that had the SPSS been utilised in the initial design stage, that the qualitative outputs might have been less comprehensible. It is difficult to know for sure at this stage whether omission or adoption would have been the best route. As expected (5.4), the value satisfaction reliability scores (Appendix4; Appendix5) of the buyer questionnaire [alpha 0.8985] were lower than those of the seller questionnaire [alpha 0.9491], confirming that the westernised contextualisation of the questions will need to be culturally modified in subsequent cycles. One issue though is quite clear. The data generated from both data sets does not provide any clear or simple mechanism that enables a clear quantitative measurement of alignment or misalignment between buyer and seller. Fig6.4 goes some way to addressing this deficiency. The consequence here is that the assumption (4.0) that the authors relationship selling expertise represents the ideal study parameters for relationship selling; and thus representing the alignment middle ground (Appendix2) between buyer and seller; is felt to have not been tested or explored in a constructive way in this exploratory study. This was certainly an error in the questionnaire design phase, and can be addressed in the next cycle. The study findings do demonstrate that the sales processes used by sellers in this market are not relational focused, but the findings do not attempt to specify how wide the gap is between incumbent hard-selling practices and relationship selling sales practices; fig6.4 does however provide an indication. While this does not necessarily mean that management tools such as a diagnostic tool cannot be developed [there is enough substantive data to allow exploratory design], it does mean that several additional cycles will be required before such tools can be deployed into the organisation except as part of further exploratory studies, as opposed to the hoped for immediate adoption.

55

It is clear that future cycles will need to be more rigorous in the approach taken to research in order to maximise the utility of the data collected, and so reduce the incidents of limitation experienced in this exploratory study.

6.6

Conclusions from the study

By utilising the principles of grounded theory; firstly in developing the methodology used in this study (fig2.5); and secondly in allowing the study to evolve as a continuous programme of research (section2); this study truly represents the start of a long and interesting journey. At the same time, the outcome from the study does have some immediate applications that can be deployed operationally in our organisation [albeit initially as further exploration] which was the underlying objective of this study from the outset. As successive cycles are completed and further modification of management tools and sales practices are deployed as a consequence of those studies; this organisation should evolve a culture of continual exploration and learning that can be relied upon into the longer-term future as a significant competitive advantage in an otherwise conventionalist market. 6.7 Directions for future research cycles

From the outset, this study was intended as an exploratory one, and as such accepted that subsequent cycles would remedy invalid assumptions or analysis misunderstandings caused [for example] by research inexperience; and in fact was intended as an integral part of the research process; on the premise that errors sometimes open doors that would not normally be opened, sometimes leading to unexpected conceptualisations. Furthermore, the study limitations would also be addressed in time too through the research methodology adopted (Fig2.5). As this exploratory study progressed, numerous modifications emerged for the next cycle, and can be summarised as follows: o Both data sample sets need expanding to deliver higher quality statistical and qualitative analysis capacities o The Perception Framework needs to be analysed in depth [particularly factor analysis] in order to better understand its quantitative applications; and in so doing introduce modifications that can make The Perception Framework more

56

effective for its tasks; and verify the emergent theory components of two variables and one constant o There is a need to more thoroughly explore and verify the diagnostic tool and the principle that the tangible and intangible drivers are reversed in order to identify seller remedial actions o The SPSS statistical tool needs to be incorporated into the design and development phases of future studies o o The Evaluation Matrix lines of delineation need verifying Variants to the Evaluation Matrix need building to develop the diagnostic tool toward diagnosing barriers at the determinator level; and to test The Perception Framework sub-levels statistically

57

Application

As argued in 5.1, the remedy to a buyers negative tangible or intangible experience, in the context of transactionally derived value satisfaction lies in reversing the driver state in order to identify what remedial solution is required; so that the seller can better align relationship development and transactional processes toward the buyer. The data collected in this study has helped identify and measure the existence and extent of buying barriers that were conceptualised in The Perception Framework (Appendix1), and tested in the questionnaires (Appendix3). The literature research conducted (section3) helped identify the aforementioned buying barriers by examining the components of the sales process, while concurrently examining the causes or issues related to those barriers, and thereby identifying what remedies would be most appropriate for each barrier; on the premise that the alleviation of those barriers would result in the seller better aligning with how the buyer would prefer to buy. The research and findings from this exploratory study therefore represent the basis for designing a diagnostic tool that can identify remediation needs for the selling practices of sales staff (table7.0), using The Perception Framework as the construct (Appendix1), and the Evaluation Matrix (6.1) as the test mechanism.

Table7.0: The Intertransactional Process diagnostic tool [framework]

Quadrant Tangible (see) Organisational systems and processes Intangible (feel) Individual sales practices Determinator Tangible (see) Intangible (feel)

Comfort

Reward/recognition What is the sellers true motivation?

Prospecting What approach methodology is being used? Diagnostic capabilities How effective is the training and mentoring programmes?

Motive Commentary Behaviour Awareness Technical Interpersonal Ethics Performance Features Personality Feasibility Utility Insecurity Possession Compromise Necessity

Reliability What approach methods the buyer would prefer

Image How the buyer would like the seller to be motivated

Competence

Technical training How dependable is the sellers diagnosis?

Skills What conduct the buyer wants the seller to exhibit

Conduct How dependable the buyer wants the seller to be

Solution

Information gathering How effective are the sellers persuasion skills at using the information acquired? Selection process How adaptable is the sellers behavioral skills?

Communication skills How effective is the seller at communicating the offering? Social skills What sales tactics is the seller prepared to employ?

Promise What the buyer wants to buy

Acceptability How the buyer would like to be persuaded to make a commitment to buy

Motivation

Consequence What sales techniques the buyer would prefer to see used?

Desire How the buyer wants to buy

58

As table7.0 demonstrates, seller remedies can be classified as organisational [tangible] or individual [intangible]. The Organisational systems and processes impact cultural perspectives of sales staff across the entire organisation, particularly in that it demonstrates what is deemed [implicit and explicit] as acceptable conduct to the tasks in hand; which largely influences the buyers perception of the behavioural values exhibited by the seller; and as such symbolises a more intangible representation of the offering. The individual sales practices represent the manner by which the individual seller communicates his offering to the buyer; and as such symbolises a more tangible representation of the offering. Therefore, any remedial tool will need to consider both organisational and individual issues, yet deploy the most appropriate solution in light of the identified barrier driver [tangible or intangible]. Utilisation of the tool at this exploratory stage should predominantly identify broad remediation requirements [at the Quadrant level] rather than specific requirements. However, after further testing and study, it is realistic to expect that the tool could identify remedial requirements at the Determinator level. The application objective for this tool lies in being able to diagnose precisely what element of the sales process is deficient at the organisational or individual level, and apply remedial action to those specific problems, rather than across the board which is the more usual practice in selling organisations. Furthermore, the tool should also be able to identify whether a deficiency in sales practices are a direct contributant or not of buyer/seller alignment/misalignment. A prime example here is the issue of whether reward and recognition structures are the primary cause for some salespeoples motives to be self-oriented rather than buyer oriented; and whether this is isolated or endemic. For the organisation, the tool would allow training and mentoring programmes to be deployed at the individual level or in small groups where each individual needs a similar remedy [reduces generic training dependency]; improving programme effectiveness; reducing the impact of lost sales time on sales revenue generation; and reducing the overall investment requirements by the organisation in training and development.

59

For individuals, particularly where substantial retraining is required [e.g. new recruits], the tool could diagnose [from the selection process tests] training requirements by orders of priority [i.e. determinators rated according to score] and the individual [or individuals] can be trained sequentially; thus sponsoring a learning spiral of learn-apply rather than learn-accumulate development cycles. Adoption of this diagnostic tool into the organisation as a proven management tool is contingent on identifying the right questions to ask utilising The Perception Framework; then identifying and quantifying barrier causality; and thereon identifying the appropriate remedial requirements. As yet, this process is not substantively tested. Confirmation or disconfirmation can only be realised through rigorous methodology and application. Once subsequent cycles (Fig2.5) have been employed, there should be sufficient data to confirm that the tool has a practical application in the world of sales transactions. A resultant shift in value satisfaction patterns upward should confirm the validity of this diagnostic tool and framework as an effective management tool that can be successfully modified in the pursuit of positive and valuable transactional outcomes most of the time.

60

Implications of the study

While the product/service features offered by the seller to the buyer is important; this study has postured that it is how people prefer to buy, rather than why people buy that is of more significance in transactional outcomes. This can be argued by the generic situation where the sellers product matches the requirements of the buyer, yet the transaction fails because the buyer chooses to buy that same product from an alternative seller. Another example might be where a buyer chooses to shop for groceries in a preferred store rather than a store that is locationally more convenient. In both examples, the buyer bought what they wanted; or bought where they wanted; but it is difficult to understand or know how they arrived at those decisions. Relationship marketing research argues that the variable factor between examples such as these is the existence of a relationship; with much study devoted to how relationships are developed, in the context of organisation to organisation, or organisation to individual transactional situations. Predominantly, the argument of relationship marketers rests upon image or branding, in the context of the organisations ability to influence the buying outcome. This study has devoted its attention to how buyers prefer to buy, which on the surface does not seem too distinctive a difference from the relationship marketing position of how and why a buyer buys a particular product, or shops at a particular store (Hkansson et al., 1976). The contextual difference is that relationship marketing largely focuses upon the cognitive elements in the transactional decision process in the belief [largely] that cognitive influences are more dominant than conative influences in buyer decision making behaviour. Furthermore, relationship marketing focuses its application on elements that enable the seller to better influence outcomes through desire, possession and experience; in so doing empower the product to do much of the selling [e.g. branding and packaging]; and predominantly is oriented toward the mass volume market. This may be all well and good for physical [tangible] products, but the selling of a service [intangible] in a one-to-one transactional setting of relationship selling is far more complex; primarily due to the dynamic natures of the buyer and seller interactions of personality and perceptions; and it is certainly

61

arguable

that

relationship

marketing

principles

are

less

applicable

in

this

transactional context. Perhaps relationship marketers would argue that this differential is a fine line. But is it not more arguable that the preferred store appeals more to the buyer because the stores sales methodology is more aligned with the manner in which the buyer prefers to buy? Or that the first seller failed to exhibit a sufficiently appealing sales methodology or behavioural manner and was therefore unable to correctly align with the buyer? By seeking to quantitatively measure the dynamic interaction between cognitive [tangible] and conative [intangible] influences, this study [and subsequent cycles] aims to better understand the factors and dimensions that determine a buyers buying preferences, in the context of how they would prefer to buy. The outcome of such a study should allow the seller to understand how better to align their transactional and relational processes to that of the buyer, and so increase the incidences of positive and valuable transactional outcomes through more effective marketing processes and tactics.

8.1

An emergent theory: The Inter-transactional process

In the process of constructing The Perception Framework it became apparent that any influence over the transaction participants could be described as exhibiting one of two states: either an intangible influence or tangible influence; in the context of what determined the outcome from each issue interaction; and can be summarised by the following emergent theory: ET1 That any transactional outcome is determined by the extent of the interaction between a tangible driver and an intangible driver ET1a If the tangible driver has high influence, and the intangible driver has high influence; the transactional outcome determined by their interaction is positive ET1b If the tangible driver has low influence, and the intangible driver has low influence; the transactional outcome determined by their interaction is negative

62

ET1c

If the tangible driver has high influence, and the intangible driver has low influence; the transactional outcome determined by their interaction is contingent on the conduct of the seller

ET1d

If the tangible driver has low influence, and the intangible driver has high influence; the transactional outcome determined by their interaction is contingent on the product/service features offered by the seller

No matter how far you cut the cake (Appendix1) there is always a tangible and intangible driver for each determinator when measuring always participant three the deliver

Fig8.1a: Intertransactional process

H Intangible driver

perception

(fig8.1a).

Therefore,

these

Determinator

Intertransactional EH1.

components

same outcome dimensions (fig8.1b) as described in

Tangible driver

Fig8.1b: Intertransactional outcomes

When discussing the study findings (6.4) reference was made to some preliminary statistical analysis conducted on The Perception Framework. It was noted that the SPSS statistical factor analysis generated three factors rather than the expected two: tangible and intangible factors. This was deemed at the time firstly as being erroneous; and secondly of no real

H Offering of the seller

Intangible driver

Successful transaction

Transaction failure

Conduct of the seller

Tangible driver

consequence given the qualitative objectives of cluster analysis which were selected for this exploratory Study. Earlier explanations promoted included the recognition that a third primary variable was inadvertently omitted in the conceptualisation and design stages of this exploratory study; or that a third interactive component existed but had not been recognised. It was conjected that of these two realistic explanations, the existence of third component was the more likely; and subsequent cycles of study and conceptualisation would be required to understand why this statistical data occurred. It is now postulated that EH1 comprises two variable components [tangible and intangible drivers] and one constant component [determinator]; and subsequent cycles should seek to confirm or disconfirm this.

63

Throughout this study, the focus was on the interaction of tangible and intangible drivers, on the premise that the output determined by their interaction simply formed a contributory value in the next layer upward, rather than any explicit component in its own right. This SPSS factor analysis; believed initially to be erroneous [and therefore omitted: for future study]; and after further consideration now points to some indicative evidence that this emergent theory has some realistic substance or basis [statistically] for measuring actual participant perceptions; and consequently The Perception Framework [having used this emergent theory as its guiding principle] has some validity too. Many of the arguments against using grounded theory as a research methodology is that under-analysis or over-induction is a constant risk (section2); and one that often results in the failing of the emergent theorist to fulfill conventional research fundamentals such as generalisability; significance; replicability; precision; and verificability. The methodology adopted (Fig2.5) was specifically evolved in a way to avoid these pitfalls by the inclusion of an applications stage. In that way, any emergent outcome would have to be applied in the context of the research intentions; and thereby at least determine whether the study findings fulfilled research conventions; and as such achieved the objectives of the study [exploratory or not]. One might conclude that the methodological fundamental of precision; given the admitted statistical factor analysis omission; could indicate a lack of study precision in this exploratory study. However, this exploratory study was intended as a learning of not only the subject at hand, but also a learning of the art of studying. Certainly this lesson will be applied in the next and subsequent cycles.

8.2

An emergent theory: Generalisability

Can the emergent theory (8.1) be generalised beyond relationship selling? With the postulated two variables [tangible and intangible drivers] and one constant [determinator]; the principle of application is believed to be sufficiently basic for the Inter-transactional Process to potentially be applied in any interactional situation involving people; whether commercial or social oriented; where the task is to understand and measure the perceptions of those participating.

64

In the context of social interactional transactions, all participants are acting as both buyer and seller in the transactional environment. While there may be multiple transactions occurring concurrently, each individual is in reality transacting with each individual separately [and vise versa]; and as such each individual interaction could be measured, [perhaps by aggregating buyer and seller questionnaires into a single format] provided it still adhered to the principles of The Perception Framework. The transactional outcome of such interactions can still be expressed as conforming with EH1; except that the descriptive contexts could be adapted to better reflect this social interactional transaction; where the positive outcome (EH1a) is like; the negative outcome (EH1b) is dislike; the positive/negative outcome (EH1c) is attraction based upon the way someone looks [e.g. features, height, weight etc]; and the negative/positive outcome (EH1d) is attraction based upon the way someone behaves [e.g. charismatic, empathetic, humorous etc].

8.3

An emergent theory: Significance

The significance of this emergent theory lies in its simplicity, in the context of versatility. Section7 indicated several significant impacts on organisational training methodologies in terms of increased effectiveness and potential reductions to training cost. In discussing the generalisability of the inter-transactional process, the proposed example indicated how the Inter-transactional Process could be applied to measure or understand social interactions, which could have some applicational significance in social studies. For commercial transactions, the literature research (3.0) in this study identified the primary components of sales processes; when has been applied with an adapted value chain (Porter, 1985) as a theoretical test mechanism (fig8.3); and does indicate that the Inter-transaction Process could be employed in other commercial sectors such as retail or business to business situations; provided the principles of the emergent theory and The Perception Framework are adhered to. The value chain (Porter, 1985) represents the most basic components required for any process or transaction to deliver a value outcome; and therefore was seen as a suitable theoretical test mechanism; on the premise that if the Inter-transactional

65

Process could not be adapted to other commercial value chains, then its significance and generalisability is limited. As fig8.3 shows, the Inter-transactional Process does adapt to other commercial value chains. Furthermore, there is no reason to believe
Fig8.3: The Inter-transactional process: significance
Sales process Retail goods execution Environment Business-to-Business execution Circumstances Financial services execution Introduction Service Description Fact find Presentation Close Delivery Activation Value chain Inter-transaction Process Comfort Input Competence Value satisfaction Need Solution Trust

Impressions

>>>>> Relationship development >>>>>

>>>>> Relationship development >>>>>

>>>>> Relationship development >>>>>

Information Exchange

Presentation Need/desire

Offer Demand Proposition Position Compromise Agreement

Persuasion Negotiation Communication Transaction Support

Utility Price Appeal Purchase Loyalty cards

Transform

Motivation

Output

>> Contract

>> Servicing

>> Recycle

Authors own adaptation of Porter ME, Competitive advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, The Free Press, 1985

that the Inter-transactional Process could not be adapted for use in relationship marketing applications.

8.4

An emergent theory: Precision, Replication and Verification

The Perception Framework was developed to aid the design process for quantitative and qualitative data collection to ensure that the precision between tangible and intangible drivers was maintained irrespective of the number of descent levels; and particularly so if the quadrants are separated to explore more specific issues in future research cycles. The adoption of The Perception Framework by the organisation would ensure that any design modifications to the questionnaires in successive cycles [or other commercial or social adaptations] would continue to adhere to the emergent theory in a precise manner of replication that enables verification of subsequent data against existing data already collected; so that the combined data can be analysed separately and as a whole each time; thus expanding the opportunities for multidimensional analysis.
Excluding contents page, bibliography and abstract:

66

Part 1: 14,464 words Part 2: 2,524 words

Bibliography

Ainscough TL; DeCarlo HE; Leigh HW, Building expert systems from the selling scripts of multiple experts, Journal of Services Marketing, 10, 4, p6-17 Ajzen, I, 1985, "From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior", Kuhl, J., Beckman, J., Actioncontrol: From Cognition to Behavior, Springer, Heidelberg, 11-39 Ajzen, I, Fishbein, M., 1980, Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Alessandra, T, Wexler, P, Barrera, R, 1987, Non-Manipulative Selling, Prentice-Hall Press, New York, NY, 13-14. Anderson, R.E, 1991, Professional Personal Selling, Prentice-Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 33. Anderson, R.E., 1973, "Consumer dissatisfaction: the effect of disconfirmed expectancy on perceived product performance", Journal of Marketing Research, 10, 38-44. Anderson, J, Narus, J, 1990, "A model of distributor firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships", Journal of Marketing, 54, 42-58. Anglemar, R., Stern, L.W., 1978, "Development of a content analytical system for analysis of bargaining communication in marketing", Journal of Marketing Research, 93-102. Babbie, E., 1990, Survey Research Methods, 2nd ed, Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont, CA. Baker, C., Wuest, J., Stern, P., 1992, "Method slurring: the grounded theory/phenomenology example", Journal of Advanced Nursing, 17, 11, 1355-60. Barrett, M.L., Beerel, A.C., 1988, Expert Systems in Business: A Practical Approach, Ellis Horwood Ltd, Chichester. Bateson, J.E.G., 1992, Managing Services Marketing Text and Readings, Dryden Press, Orlando, FL. Beatty, S.E, Meyer, M, Coleman, J.E, Reynolds, K.E, Lee, J, 1996, "Customer-sales associate retail relationships", Journal of Retailing Beed, T.W., Stimson, R.J., Survey Interviewing Theory and Techniques, 158-79. Bejou, D; Palmer, A,Service failure and loyalty: an exploratory empirical study of airline customers, Journal of Services Marketing, 1998, 12, 1, 7 -- p22 Belth, J.O., 1973, Life Insurance: A Consumer's Handbook, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN. Bentham, J., 1789, Introduction to the Principles and Morals of Legislation, Athone Press, London. Bernstein, A., 1992, "The good life isn't only in America", Business Week, November 2. Bigus, O.E., Hadden, S.C., and Glaser, B.G. 1994. The Study of Basic Social Processes. In More Grounded Theory Methodology: A Reader (Glaser, Barney G editor), Sociology Press, pp. 38-64. Blake, K., 1995, "How phone frauds script a scam", Consumer's Research, 10-14. Boles, J.S, Barksdale, H.C. Jr, Johnson, J.T, 1997, "Business relationships: an examination of the effects of buyer-salesperson relationships on customer retention and willingness to refer and recommend", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 12, 3/4, 248-58. Bonfield, E.H., 1974, "Attitude, social influence, personal norms and intention interactions as related to brand purchase behaviour", Journal of Marketing Research, 11, 379-89 Bowen, D.E., Schneider, B., 1985, "Boundary-spanning role employees and the service encounter: some guidelines for management and research",

67

Byrne, D., 1969, "Attitudes and attraction", Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 4 Cahill, D.J., 1998, "Relationship marketing? But all I really wanted was a one-night stand", Marketing News, 32, 19, 4. Cateora, P.R., 1983, International Marketing, Richard D, Irwin, Homewood, IL. Chisnall, P.M., 1994, Consumer Behaviour, McGraw-Hill,, Maidenhead,, 59-78. Chonko, L.B., Tanner, J.F. Jr, Smith, E.R., 1991, "The salesforce's role in international marketing research and marketing information system", Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 11, 69-79.). Christopher, M., Payne, A., Ballantyne, M., Relationship Marketing, Heinemann, London, 1991. Churchill, G.A., Jr, Collins, R.H., Strang, W.A, 1975, "Should retail salespersons be similar to their customers?", Journal of Retailing, 51, 29-42. Churchill, G.A, Ford, N.M, Hartley, S.W, Walker, O.C, 1985, "The determinants of salesforce performance: a meta-analysis", Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 103-18. Clawson, C.I., Vinson, D.E., 1978, "Human values: a historical and interdisciplinary analysis", Advances in Consumer Research, 5, 396-402. Cook, R.W., Corey, R.J., 1991, "A confirmatory investigation of industrial buyer image of the saleswomen", Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 19, 199-208. Cardozo, R.N., 1965, "An experimental study of consumer effort, expectations and satisfaction", Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 64-73. Crawford, C.M., 1994, New Products Management. Crosby, L.A., 1989, "Maintaining quality in the service relationship", Brown, S.W., Gummesson, E., Quality in Services, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA. Crosby, L.A, Evans, K.R, Cowles, D, 1990, "Relationship quality in services selling: an interpersonal perspective", Journal of Marketing, 54, 68-81 Crosby, L.A., Stevens, N., 1987, "Effects of relationship marketing on relationship satisfaction, retention and prices in the life insurance industry", Journal of Marketing Research, 24, 404-11. Cummings, T, 1984, Research in Organizational Behaviour, 6, 367-422. Czepiel, J.A, Solomon, M.R, Surprenant, C.F., 1975, The Service Encounter: Managing Employee/Customer Interaction in Service Businesses, D.C. Heath and Company, Lexington, MA,, 127-47 Dabholkar, P.A, Johnston, W.J, Cathey, A.S, 1994, "The dynamics of long-term business-to-business exchange relationships", Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22, 2, 130-45. D'Anglejan, A., Tucker, G.R., 1973, "Communicating across cultures: an empirical investigation", Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 4, 1, 121-30. Davis, H.L., Silk, A.J., 1972, "Interaction and influence processes in personal selling", Sloan Management Review, 13, 59-76.). Day, G.S., Jocz, K.E., Root, H.P., 1992, "Domains of ignorance: what we most need to know", Marketing Management, Winter, 9-13. Derleda, V.J., Grzelak, J., 1982, Cooperation and Helping Behaviour: Theories and Research, Academic Press Inc. Dewey, J., 1963, "How do we think?", Hutchins, R.M., Adler, M.J., Gateway to the Great Books, 10, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Chicago, IL Dion, P.A, Notarantonio, E.M, 1992, "Salesperson communication style", The Journal of Business Communication, 29, 1, 65-77.

68

Doney, P.M., Cannon, J.P, 1997, "An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships", Journal of Marketing, 61, 35-51 Doyle, S.X, Roth, G.T, 1992, "Selling and sales management in action: the use of insight coaching to improve relationship selling", Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 12, 59-64. Dwyer, F.R, Schurr, P, Oh, S., 1987, "Developing buyer-seller relationships", Journal of Marketing, 51, 1127. Dwyer, F.R., Walker, O.C., 1981, "Bargaining in an asymmetrical power structure", Journal of Marketing, 104-15. Ebejer, J.M., Morden, M.J., "Paternalism in the Marketplace: Should a Salesman be his Buyer's Keeper?", Journal of Business Ethics, 7, 1988, 337-9. Feiertag, H., 1997, "Relationship selling works only when practiced", Hotel & Motel Management, 212, 6, 18. Foon, A.E., 1986, "A social structural approach to speech evaluation", The Journal of Social Psychology, 126, 4, 521-30. Ford, D, 1980, "Buyer/seller relationships in international industrial markets", European Journal of Marketing, 14, 5, 339-54. Ford, N.M, Walker, O.C., Churchill, G.A., Hartley, S.W, 1987, "Selecting successful salespeople: a metaanalysis of biological and psychological selection criterion", Houston, M.J., Review of Marketing, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, 90-131. Foxall, G.R., 1994, "Behaviour analysis and consumer psychology", Journal of Economic Psychology, 15, 1, 5-91. Frazier, G.L, 1983, "Interorganizational exchange behaviour in marketing channels: a broadened perspective", Journal of Marketing, 47, 68-78 Gable, M, Hollon, C., Dangello, F, 1992, "Increasing the utility of the application blank: relationship between job application information and subsequent performance and turnover of salespeople", Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 12, 40-55. Ganesan, S., 1994, "Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships", Journal of Marketing, 58, 1-19. Geyskens, I., 1998, "Generalizations about trust in marketing channel relationships using meta-analysis", International Journal of Research in Marketing, 15, 3, 223-48. Gibson, W.D., 1993, "Fielding a force of experts", Sales & Marketing Management, April, 88-92.). Gladwin, T.N., Walter, O.C., 1980, Multinationals Under Fire: Lessons from the Management of Conflict, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY. Glaser, B.G. 1998. Doing Grounded Theory: Issues and Discussions, Sociology Press, pp. 254. Glaser, B., 1992, Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: Emergence v. Forcing, The Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA. Glaser, B., 1978, Theoretical Sensitivity, The Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA. Glaser, B.G., and Strauss, A.L. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine, pp. 271 Glenn, E.S., Witmeyer, G., Stevenson, K.A., 1977, "Cultural styles of persuasion", International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 1, 3, 2-66. Goolsby, J.R, Lagrace, R.R, Boorom, M.L, 1992, "Psychological adaptiveness and sales performance", Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, XII, 2, 51-66.

69

Goulding, C, 1998, Grounded theory: the missing methodology on the interpretivist agenda, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 1, 1, 50-57 Graham, J.L., Lin, C., 1987, "Negotiations in the Republic of China (Taiwan) and the United States", Cavusgil, S.T., Advances in International Marketing, 2, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, New York, NY. Graham, J.L., 1985a, "Cross-cultural marketing negotiations: a laboratory experiment", Marketing Science, 4, 2, 130-46 Graham, J.L., 1985b, "The influence of culture on the process of business negotiations: an exploratory study", Journal of International Business, Spring, 81-96. Graham, J.L., 1985c, "Cross-cultural marketing negotiations: a laboratory experiment", Marketing Science, 4, 2, 130-46. Graham, J.L., Sano, Y., 1984, Smart Bargaining: Doing Business with the Japanese, Ballinger Publishing, Cambridge, MA. Grewal, D, Sharma, A, 1991, "The effect of salesforce behavior on customer satisfaction: an interactive framework", Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 11, 3, 13-23. Gronroos, C., "Defining Marketing: A Market-Oriented Approach", European Journal of Marketing, 23, 1, 1989, 52-60. Guba, G., Lincoln, Y., 1994, "Competing paradigms in qualitative research", Denzin, N., Lincoln, Y., Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Newbury Hill, CA. Gudykunst, W.B., Ting-Toomey, S., 1988, Culture and Interpersonal Communication, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA. Gunnarsson, J., Wahlund, R., 1997, "Household financial strategies in Sweden: an exploratory study", Journal of Economic Psychology, 18, 2, 201-33. Gutman, J., Vinson, D.E., 1979, "Value structures and consumer behaviour", Advances in Consumer Research, 6, 47-57. Haig, B.D, 1995, Grounded Theory as Scientific Method, University of Canterbury Hkansson, H, Johanson, J, Wootz, B, 1976, "Influence tactics in buyer-seller processes", Industrial Marketing Management, 5, 319-32 Hall, E.T., 1976, Beyond Culture, Doubleday, New York, NY Harris, P.R., Moran, R.T., 1987, Managing Cultural Differences, 2. p. 55 Hawes, J.M, Mast, K.E., Swan, J.E, 1989, "Trust earning perceptions of sellers and buyers", Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, IX, 1-8. Hawrysh, B.M., Zaichkowsky, J.L., 1989, "Cultural approaches to negotiations: understanding the Japanese", International Marketing Review, 7, 2, 28-42. Heide, J, 1994, "Interorganizational governance in marketing channels", Journal of Marketing, 58, 71-85. Hieder, F., 1958, The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, Wiley, New York, NY Hughes, D; Hutchins, R; Karathanassi, V, Purchase involvement methodology and product profiles: the case of cheese products in Greece, British Food Journal, 1998, 100, 7, 343 -- p350 Hutt, M.D, Speh, T.W., 1995, Business Marketing Management, 5th Edition, Dryden Press, Chicago, IL. Ingrasci, H.J, 1981, "How to reach buyers in their psychological `comfort zone", Industrial Marketing, 66, 60-4. Janes, J, Survey construction, Library Hi Tech, 1999, 17, 3, p321-325

70

Jolson, M.A., 1997, "Broadening the scope of relationship selling", Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 17, 75-88 Kahneman, F., 1978, Attention and Effort, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Kassarjian, H.H., Sheffet, M.J., 1981, "Personality and consumer behavior: an update", Kassarjian, H.H., Robertson, T.S., Perspectives in Consumer Behavior, Scott Forseman, Glenview, IL Korbel, P.J., Bell, I.R., 1985, "Fieldwork methodology: a survey of research buyers' concerns and doubts", LaBarbera, P.A., Mazursky, D., 1983, "A longitudinal assessment of consumer satisfaction/ dissatisfaction the dynamic aspect of the cognitive process", Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 393-404. Lagace, R.R., Dahlstrom, R., Gassenheimer, J.B., "The Relevance of Ethical Salesperson Behaviour on Relationship Quality in the Pharmaceutical Industry", Sales Management, 4, Fall, 1991, 39-47 Lambert, D.M, Sharma, A, Levy, M., 1997, "What information can relationship marketers obtain from customer evaluations of salespeople?, Industrial Marketing Management, 26, 177-87 Lamont, L.W., Lundstrom, W.J, 1977, "Identifying successful industrial salesmen by personality and personal characteristics", Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 517-29. Laurent, G., Kapferer, J-N., 1985, "Measuring consumer involvement profiles", Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 41-53. Leong, S.M., Busch, P.S., John, D.R., 1989, "Knowledge bases and salesperson effectiveness: a scripttheoretic analysis", Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 164-78. Levy, S., Zaltman, G., Marketing, Society and Conflict, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1975. Levy, M, Sharma, A, 1994, "Adaptive selling: the role of gender, age, sales experience, and education", Journal of Business Research, 31, 39-47. Lewin, K, Field theory in social science, New York, Harper & Row, 1951 Lindqvist, A., 1981, "A note on the determinants of household saving behaviour", Journal of Economic Psychology, 1, 1, 39-57. Linkemer, B., 1989, "Women in sales: what do they really want?", Sales and Marketing Management, 141, 61-5. Lott, A.J., Lott, B.E., 1965, "Group cohesiveness as interpersonal attractiveness: a review of relationships with antecedent and consequent variables", Psychological Bulletin, 64, 4, 259-309. Lovelock, C.H., 1992, Managing Services, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Lovelock, C.H., "Classifying Services to Gain Strategic Marketing Insight", Journal of Marketing, 47, Summer, 1983, 9-20 Lowenstein, G., 1987, "Anticipation and the valuation of delayed consumption", The Economic Journal, 97, 666-84. Lunt, P., 1996, "Discourses of savings", Journal of Economic Psychology, 17, 6, 677-90. Marshall, A., 1891, Principles of Economics, Macmillan, London. McQuarrie, E.F, 1993, Customer Visits: Building a Better Market Focus", Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA Miles, M.P, Arnold, D.R, Nash, H.W, 1990, "Adaptive communication: the adaptation of the seller's interpersonal style to the stage of the Dyad's relationship and the buyer's communication style", Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, X, 21-7 Miller, G., 1956, "The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity to Process Information", Pyschological Review, 63, 2, 81-7.

71

Mohr, J, Nevin, R., 1990, "Communication strategies in marketing channels: a theoretical perspective", Journal of Marketing, 54, 36-51. Moorman, C, Zaltman, G, Deshpande, R, 1992, "Relationships between providers and users of market research: the dynamics of trust within and between organizations", Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 314-28. Morgan, R.M., Hunt, S.D, 1994, "The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing", Journal of Marketing, 58, 3, 20-38. Morse, J.M., 1994, "Emerging from the data: the cognitive process of analysis in qualitative enquiry", Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Moss, Charles D; Richardson, B, European Journal of Marketing; Volume 19 No. 6; 1985 Neslin, S., Greenhalgh, L., 1983, "Nash's theory of co-operative games as a predictor of the outcomes of buyer-seller negotiations: an experiment in media purchasing", Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 36879). Newcombe, T.M., 1956, "The prediction of interpersonal attraction", American Psychologist, 11, 575-86. Newman, J.W., Werbal, R.A., 1973, "Multivariate analysis of brand loyalty for major household appliances", Journal of Marketing Research, 10, 404-9. O'Callaghan, J., 1996, "Grounded theory: a potential methodology", Counseling Psychology Review, 11, 1, 23-8. Oliver, R.L., Linda, G., 1981, "Effect of satisfaction and its antecedents on consumer preference and intention", Advances in Consumer Research, 8, 88-93. Oliver, R.L., Swan, J.E., 1989a, "Consumer perception of interpersonal equity and satisfaction in transactions: a field survey approach", Journal of Marketing, 53, 21-35. Oliver, R.L., Swan, J.E., 1989b, "Equity and disconfirmation perceptions as influences on merchant and product satisfaction", Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 372-83. Onkvisit, S., Shaw, J.J., 1993, International Marketing, Macmillan, Basingstoke Orasanu, J., Penney, M., 1986, "Comprehension theory and how it grew", Orasanu, J., Reading Comprehension: From Research to Practice, Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. Orton, J.D, 1997, "From inductive to iterative grounded theory: zipping the gap between process theory and process data", Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13, 4, 419-38. Pacheco, P.L., 1989, "Satisfaction guaranteed: a marketing research approach to measuring customer satisfaction and identifying competitive opportunities", Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 4, 117. Parker, C, Mathews, B, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Volume 19 No. 1; 2001 Pennington, A.L., 1968, "Customer-salesman bargaining behaviour in retail transactions", Journal of Marketing Research, 103-5. Peppers, D, Rogers, M., 1999, "Is your company ready for one-to-one marketing?", Harvard Business Review, 77, 1, 151-60. Peterson, R.A., 1988, Marketing Research, Business Publications Inc., Plano, TX. Poppleton, S.E., 1981, "The social skills of selling", Argyle, M., Social Skills and Work, Methuen, 59-84 Porter ME, Competitive advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, The Free Press, 1985 Pruitt, D.G., Negotiation Behaviour, Academic Press Inc., New York, NY, 1981. Ramsey, R.P, Sohi, R.S, 1997, "Listening to your customers: the impact of perceived salesperson listening behavior on relationship outcomes", Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25, 2.

72

Rich, M.K, Smith, D.C, 2000, "Determining relationship skills of prospective salespeople", Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 15, 1. Riley, R., 1996, "Revealing socially constructed knowledge through quasi-structured interviews and grounded theory analysis", Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 15, 2, 21-40. Ryan, M.J., Bonfield, E.H., 1975, "The Fishbein extended model and consumer behaviour", Journal of Consumer Research, 2, 118-36 Rubin, J.Z., Brown, B.R., 1975, The Social Psychology of Bargaining and Negotiation, Academic Press, New York, NY. Saxe, R, and Weitz R.A, "The SOCO Scale: A Measure of the Customer Orientation of Sales People", Journal of Marketing Research, 19, August, 1982, 340-51 Schwarz, N. 1999, Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist, 54, 93105. Schurr, P.H, Ozanne, J.L, 1985, "Influence on exchange processes: buyers' preconceptions of a seller's trustworthiness and bargaining toughness", Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 4, 939-53. Shaw, D; and Clarke, I, Belief formation in ethical consumer groups: an exploratory study, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 1999, 17, 2, 109 -- p120 Simintiras AC; Thomas AH, 1998, Cross-cultural sales negotiations: A literature review and research propositions, International Marketing Review, 15, 1, p. 10-28 Skodol-Wilson, H., Ambler-Hutchinson, S., 1996, "Methodological mistakes in grounded theory", Nursing Research, 45, 2, 122-4. Stening, B.W., 1979, "Problems in cross-cultural contact: a literature review", International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 3, 269-313. Stern, P.N., 1994, "Eroding grounded theory", Morse, J.M., Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Strauss, A., 1991, Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Strauss, A., Corbin, J., 1994, "Grounded theory methodology: an overview", Denzin, N., Lincoln, Y., Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA. Strauss, A., Corbin, J., 1990, Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage Publications, London. Strong, C, 1997, "The problems of translating fair trade principles into consumer purchase behaviour", Marketing Intelligence, Planning, 15, 1, 32-7 Struebing, L., 1996, "Customer loyalty: playing for keeps", Quality Progress, 25-30. Sudman, S., Bradburn, N., & Schwarz, N., 1996, Thinking about answers: The application of cognitive processes to survey methodology, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Sullivan, J., Peterson, R., "Factors Associated with Trust in Japanese-American Joint Ventures", Management International Review, 22, 1982, 33-40 Swan, J.E., Mercer, A.A., 1981, "Consumer satisfaction as a function of equity and disconfirmation", Hunt, H.K., Day, R.L., Conceptual and Empirical Contributions to Consumer Satisfaction and Complaining Behaviour, School of Business, Indiana University, Bloomington, 2-8. Swan, J.E, Nolan, H.J, 1985, "Gaining customer trust: a conceptual guide for the salesperson", Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 5, 39-48. Swan, J.E., Rink, D.R., Kiser, G.E., Martin, W.S., 1984, "Industrial buyer image of the saleswoman", Journal of Marketing, 48, 110-16.

73

Swan, J.E, Trawick, I.F. Jr, Rink, D.R, Roberts, J.J., 1988, "Measuring dimensions of purchaser trust of industrial salespeople", Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 8, 1-9. Symanski, D.M., "Determinants of Selling Effectiveness: The Importance of Declarative Knowledge to the Personal Selling Concept", Journal of Marketing, 52, January, 1988, 64-77. Szymanski, D. M., Churchill, G.A. Jr, 1990, "Client evaluation cues: a comparison of successful and unsuccessful salespeople", Journal of Marketing Research, 27, 163-74. Teare, RE, 1998, Interpreting and responding to customer needs, The Journal of Workplace Learning, 10, 2, p76-94 The Chambers Dictionary, 1994, Chambers Harrap Publishers Triandis, H.C., 1960, "Cognitive similarity and communication in the dyad", Human Relations, 13, 175-83. Tsalikis, J., Deshields, O.W., LaTour, M.L., 1991, "The role of accent on the credibility and effectiveness of the salesperson", Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 9, 1, 31-41. Tsalikis, J., Ortiz-Buonafina, M., LaTour, M.S., 1992, "The role of accent on credibility and effectiveness of the international business person: the case of Guatemala", International Marketing Review, 9, 4, 57-72. Tung, R.L., 1988, "Toward a conceptual paradigm of international business negotiations", Advances in International Comparative Management, 3, 203-19. Turban, E., 1990, Decision Support and Expert Systems, 2. Usunier, J.-C, 1996, Marketing Across Cultures, 2nd ed., Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ Van Zandt, H.F., 1970, "How to negotiate in Japan", Harvard Business Review, 45-56. Verhallen T M M, Greve H, Framback R T, 1997, International Journal of Bank Marketing, (UK), 15, 2 Vernon, P.E., 1964, Personality Assessment, Methuen, London. Walker, O.C., Churchill, G.A. Jr, Ford, N.M, 1977, "Motivation and performance in industrial selling: present knowledge and needed research", Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 156-68. Walters, C.G., Bergiel, B.J., 1989, Consumer Behaviour: A Decision-Making Approach, South-Western, Cincinnati, OH. Wrneryd, K.-E., 1999a, The Psychology of Saving: A Study of Economic Psychology, Edward Elgar Publishing, Northampton. Wrneryd, K.-E., 1999b, "The role of macroeconomic psychology", Applied Psychology - An International Review/Psychology Appliquee - Revue Internationale, 48, 3, 273-96. Wrneryd, K.-E., 1989, "On the psychology of saving: an essay on economic behaviour", Journal of Economic Psychology, 10, 5, 515-41. Webster, F., 1965, "The industrial salesman as a source of market information", Business Horizons, Spring, 77-82. Weitz, B.A, 1981, "Effectiveness in sales interactions: a contingency framework", Journal of Marketing, 45, 85-103. Weitz, B.A., Sujan, H., Sujan, M., 1986, "Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behaviour: a framework for improving selling effectiveness", Journal of Marketing, 50, 174-91. Weitz, B.A, Wright, P, 1978, "The salesperson as a marketing strategist: the relationship between field sales performance and insights about one's customers", MSI Working Paper No.78-120, Marketing Science Institute, Boston, MA. Wells, K., 1995, "The strategy of grounded theory: possibilities and problems", Social Work Research, 19, 1, 33-7.

74

Whalen, J., Pitts, R.E., Wong, J.K., "Exploring the Structure of Ethical Attributions as a Component of a Consumer Decision Model: The Vicarious Versus Personal Perspective", Journal of Business Ethics 10, 1991, 285-93. Wheelwright, S.C., Clark, K.B., 1992, Revolutionizing Product Development, The Free Press, New York, NY Woodruff, R.B., Cadotte, E.R., Jenkins, R.L., 1982, "Charting a path for CS/D research", Day, R.L., Hunt, H.K., International Fare in Consumer Satisfaction and Complaining Behaviour, School of Business, Indiana University, Bloomington, 118-23. Yoho, D, 1998, "From the practitioners desk: a comment on `broadening the scope of relationship selling", Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 18, 51-4. Zajonc, R.B., 1980, "Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences", American Psychologist, 35, 151-75. Zebrowitz-McArthur, L., 1988, in M. Harris Bond (Ed.), The Cross Cultural Challenge to Social Psychology, Sage Publications Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L., Parasuraman, A., 1988, "Communication and control processes in the delivery of service quality", Journal of Marketing, 52, 35-48. Zeithaml, A., Bitner, M.J., 1996, Services Marketing, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

75

Appendix1: The Perception Framework

Intangible Question Expertise Tangible Question

Technical

Motive

Tangible Question Intangible Question Sentiment

Skills Intangible Question Tangible Question Competence Intangible Question Comfort

Image Tangible Question Intangible Question

Inter-personal

Commentary

Ethics

Behaviour

Tangible Question Intangible Question Shared values

Integrity

Tangible Question Conduct Intangible Question Tangible Question VALUE SATISFACTION Tangible Question Intangible Question Tangible Question Possession Intangible Question Tangible Question Compromise Motivation Solution Desire Trust Performance Awareness Reliability

Tangible Question Intangible Question

Insecurity Need Promise

Features

Intangible Question Tangible Question

Benefit

Appeal

Personality

Intangible Question Tangible Question

Feasibility

Intangible Question Tangible Question Suitability

Priority

Intangible Question Tangible Question Necessity Intangible Question Consequence Key

Tangible Intangible

Acceptability Intangible Question Tangible Question

Utility

Original work of the author

76

Appendix2: Buyer and seller alignment

What do we need to know about the sellers business practices? >The sellers perspective < Comfort Motive Commentary Behaviour Awareness Competence Technical Inter-personal Ethics Performance Solution Features Personality Feasibility Utility Motivation Insecurity Possession Compromise Necessity Has the sale been contrived through fear or greed? Is the sale based on unrealistic buyer expectations? Does this product appropriately balance cost and benefit? Is the product necessary? The seller will not manipulate the buyer into a panic-buy The seller will not manipulate the buyer into a greed-buy The seller will not deliver a product where cost outweighs benefit The seller will not deliver a product that is unnecessary The buying reasons are objective The buying reasons are realistic The solution balances cost and benefit The solution is necessary Are the sellers descriptions accurate? Is the sellers reasoning for the recommendations sound? Is the seller sure the buyer can afford the product? Is the seller sure the product is the most suitable for this buyer? The product delivered matches the sellers description That the sellers reasoning is reliable The product to be affordable The product to be the most suitable The product solution is appropriate Buyer and seller understanding of the basis for the solution coincide Buyer resource availability and product fulfillment coincide The product fulfills buyer requirements Does the seller know enough to be competent? Is the sellers sales style enabling or disabling? Is the seller acting with integrity? Is the sellers promise deliverable? The seller to be competent The seller to understand his needs and objectives The seller to act with integrity The product to fulfill the sellers promise The seller is sufficiently competent to fulfill his role Both parties are empowered to make the right decision The transaction is founded on honesty Expectations and reality coincide Is the seller serving only his own best interests? Is the sellers conduct consistent with public sentiment? Is the seller using unreasonable sales techniques (manipulative/hard)? Is the seller being selective with the information exchange? The seller to serve the buyers best interests That he can disregard negative public sentiment with this seller The seller to use sales techniques that are reasonable To exchange comprehensive information with the seller Seller motives are aligned with buyer motives Sentiment is neutral/positive
(In terms of its influence on perception)

What do we need to know about the buyers ideal expectations? The buyer expects >The buyers perspective <

The middle ground > Buyer and seller aligned <

Hard-sell techniques are not necessary The information exchange is mutually beneficial

77

Appendix3: Questionnaire questions

Quadrant

Questions for the seller? > The sellers perspective < Tangible (see) Do you think that buyers are never suspicious of your motives? Would you rate press sentiment about financial advisers as positive? Intangible (feel) Do you think that buyers never find your closing tactics hard-hitting? Would you rate the sentiment of consumers about financial advisers as positive? Do you think buyers find your reasoning sufficiently comforting for them to easily accept the solutions you present? Do you feel buyers think you give them enough product information?

Determinator

Questions for the buyer? > The buyers perspective < Intangible (feel) Did you think that the seller was motivated by your best interests? Would you rate press sentiment about financial advisers as positive? Do you think that the sellers approach correctly understood your needs and concerns? Do you think that the seller obtained enough information about you to understand your situation? Tangible (see) Did you think that the sellers sales tactics were reasonable? Would you rate the sentiment of your peers about financial advisers as positive? Do you think the sellers reasoning for this product as a solution was sound? Do you think the seller gave you enough information about the product?

Motive

Commentary

Comfort

Do you think buyers find your approach sufficiently comforting for them to always give you enough information to correctly understand their needs and concerns? Do you feel buyers think you always get enough information from them to correctly understand their situation? Do you think that buyers find you always keep your technical explanations relevant to the product you are presenting? Do you think that buyers feel you correctly understand their objectives? Do you think that buyers generally find your solutions to be appropriate for their circumstances? Do you think that buyers always believe your solutions to be realistic?

Behaviour

Awareness

Do you think that buyers find your technical explanations easy to understand? Do you think that buyers feel you correctly identify their needs? Do you think that buyers easily accept your assessment of the best solutions available to them? Do you think that buyers always believe you have already considered all the positives and negatives before presenting a solution? Do you think that buyers always realise that the product features match your assessment of their circumstances as the solution they need? Do you think that buyers always find your approach makes it easier for them to understand their own situation? Do you think that buyers always feel you have correctly identified what their highest priorities are? Do you think that buyers always believe it is feasible for the product to deliver those expectations? Do you think that buyers never need help in making a commitment to buy? Do you think that buyers never believe they should delay making a commitment to buy? Do you think that buyers always feel that the product provides a good balance between needs and objectives? Do you think that buyers always feel that the product was the most suitable solution for their needs?

Technical

Were the explanations by the seller relevant to the features of your product? Do you think that the seller correctly understood your objectives? Do you think that the solutions presented by the seller were the most appropriate given your circumstances? Did you think that the solutions the seller presented were realistic?

Did you fully understand the features of the product and how they work? Do you think the seller correctly identified your needs? Do you think the seller gave you his best assessment of the solutions available to you? Did you think the seller considered all the positives and negatives before presenting a solution?

Competence

Inter-personal

Ethics

Performance

Do you think that buyers always realise that your explanation of the product features match their needs and objectives? Do you think that buyers always find your approach makes it easier for them to understand the solution you are describing? Do you think that buyers always feel you have correctly assessed the resources they have available? Do you think that buyers always have unrealistic expectations about the solution? Do you think that buyers always believe that your proposal is only solution to their needs? Do you think that buyers always believe the product will exceed their objectives? Do you think that buyers always feel that the solution is the only way to balance cost and benefit? Do you think that the buyer always believes that your solution was the only practical means to meet their requirements?

Features

Did the sellers explanation of the product features match your needs and objectives? Did the sellers conduct make it easier for you to understand the solution described? Did the seller take into account what resources you had available? Did you think the expectations you had about the solution were realistic

Did the sellers explanation of the product features match the assessment of your circumstances? Did the sellers conduct and approach make it easier for you to understand your situation? Did the seller take into account which objectives were the highest priority? Do you think that it is feasible for the product to deliver those expectations? Do you think that not committing to buy the product would have made your situation worse? Do you think that you could have waited before buying the product? Do you feel that the product delivered a good balance between your need and objectives? Do you feel that the product was the most suitable way to deliver a solution for your needs?

Solution

Personality

Feasibility

Utility

Insecurity

Did you think that this product was the complete solution to your needs? Did you think that this product would exceed your objectives? Do you feel that the product delivered a good balance between cost and benefit? Do you feel that the product was the most practical means for you to meet your requirements?

Possession

Motivation

Compromise

Necessity

78

Appendix4: Buyer data set

Statistical SPSS reliability analysis (method 2: covariance matrix) used trust and need as independent variables and outcome as the dependent variable; Trust: Alpha T-Squared probability Tukey estimate Average CI 95%: 0.8772 0.0000 2.6823 0.8194 0.9159 0.0000 0.8145 0.0000 3.1432 0.7272 0.8730 0.0000 0.8985 0.0000 3.3380 0.8518 0.9302 0.0000

Lower Upper Sig

Need:

Alpha T-Squared probability Tukey estimate Average CI 95%:

Lower Upper Sig

Satisfaction:

Alpha T-Squared probability Tukey estimate Average CI 95%:

Lower Upper Sig

Statistical SPSS regression analysis used trust and need as independent variables and cases [outcome, approach methods and repeat-buy] as the dependent variable; Trust/need/outcome: Annova Beta trust: Beta need: Coefficient constant: Standard residual deviation: Annova Beta trust: Beta need: Coefficient constant: Standard residual deviation: Annova Beta trust: Beta need: Coefficient constant: Standard residual deviation: 0.000 0.653 (sig 0.000) 0.325 (sig 0.000) 0.000 0.982 0.041 -0.029 (sig 0.853) 0.347 (sig 0.030) 0.000 0.982 0.101 0.414 (sig 0.142) 0.609 (sig 0.038) 0.498 0.935

Trust/need/approach method:

Trust/need/repeat-buy:

79

Appendix5: Seller data set

Statistical SPSS reliability analysis (method 2: covariance matrix) used trust and need as independent variables and outcome as the dependent variable; Trust: Alpha T-Squared probability Tukey estimate Average CI 95%: 0.9448 0.2436 0.4556 0.8904 0.9715 0.0000 0.8371 0.0074 0.9367 0.6765 0.9158 0.0000 0.9491 insufficient cases 0.6991 0.9004 0.9735 0.0000

Lower Upper Sig

Need:

Alpha T-Squared probability Tukey estimate Average CI 95%:

Lower Upper Sig

Value satisfaction:

Alpha T-Squared probability Tukey estimate Average CI 95%:

Lower Upper Sig

Statistical SPSS regression analysis used trust and need as independent variables and cases [prospecting methods and career longevity] as the dependent variable; Trust/need/prospecting method: Annova Beta trust: Beta need: Coefficient constant: Standard residual deviation: Annova Beta trust: Beta need: Coefficient constant: Standard residual deviation: 0.656 0.198 (sig 0.669) 0.363 (sig 0.435) 0.034 0.946 0.000 0.734 (sig 0.004) 0.172 (sig 0.438) 0.010 0.946

Trust/need/career longevity:

80

Appendix6: Framework factor analysis (for record purposes)

Factor Analysis: Trust (buyer)

81

Factor Analysis: Trust (Buyer)

82

Factor Analysis: Trust (Seller)

83

Factor Analysis: Need (Seller)

84