Methodology

Journal of Selling

Northern Illinois University20

Running an Effective Induction Program for New Sales Recruits: Lessons from the Financial Services Industry

By Zahed Subhan, Roger Brooksbank, Scott Rader, Duncan Steel, and Kimberley Mackey

Little research to date has considered how best to deploy the training and coaching activities that typically combine to form the basis of a salesperson induction program. Accordingly, set within the context of the embattled financial services industry, this paper seeks to profile the key characteristics of a successful induction program for new sales recruits. Based on depth interviews with senior business development executives from two “matched pairs” of higher and lower performing financial services companies in the United Kingdom and New Zealand respectively, the study identifies a number of practical “how-to-do-its” for planning and executing a successful induction program. In particular, the findings indicate that above all else, the higher performers are differentiated from their lower performing counterparts by the extent to which they have sought to properly integrate and align their sales training and sales coaching activities.

Key Words: Sales training, salesperson induction, coaching, financial services selling, depth interviews

iNtrODUctiON

The bar has been raised. In a world where businesses

are becoming increasingly proficient at managing a

wide range of multi-channel, multi-touch customer

interactions, how can we help new salespeople to measure

up to customers’ expectations? Across many industries,

professional salespeople perform a dizzying number of

essential tasks such as prospecting for new customers,

selling goods and services that are well matched to

each customer’s requirements and, through providing

customer service and undertaking other customer care

and relationship building activities, facilitating longer

term “repeat selling,” “up selling,” and “cross selling”

opportunities (Ennew and Waite 2012; Kaishev, Nielsen

and Thuring 2013; Thuring et al. 2012). Toward this

end, firms invest in what is usually, if somewhat loosely,

referred to as “sales training” (a processual concept that

often includes a blend of different teaching and learning

methods). Here, both conventional wisdom (Futrrell

2005) and empirical evidence (Aberdeen Group 2012;

Boehle 2010; Valencius 2009) combine to suggest

that, to the extent that a sales training program is well

funded and properly planned and executed, it can have

a dramatically positive, if not transformative impact on

sales performance, both at the individual salesperson

and sales team level.

Despite an emerging recognition of the strategic

importance of leveraging personal selling and sales

training initiatives amid the increasingly complex and

competitive business environments of today (Adamson,

Dixon and Toman 2012; Fogel et al. 2012; Lassk et

al. 2012; Sarin et al. 2010), little research to date has

considered how best to deploy the training and coaching

activities that typically combine to form the basis of a

salesperson introductory (i.e., “induction”) program.

Yet such programs, designed for on-boarding new sales

recruits, typically require a good deal of investment

(Martini 2012). Moreover, when properly executed

they can prove to be an invaluable source of strategic

advantage. By reducing the downstream churn rate

among new recruits compared with competitors, any

potentially negative downstream effects associated with a

loss of consistency in the quality of the customer’s buying

experience can be mitigated (Callender and Reid 1993;

Zahed subhan (Ph.D., University of Leeds, UK), Assistant Professor of Entrepreneurship, Sales and Marketing, Western Carolina University, [email protected].

roger Brooksbank (Ph.D., University of Bradford, UK), Associate Professor of Marketing, Waikato Management School, University of Waikato, [email protected].

scott rader (Ph.D., University of Tennessee, USA), Assistant Professor of Entrepreneurship, Sales and Marketing, Western Carolina University, [email protected].

Duncan steel (Master of Sales Management, University of Portsmouth, UK), Managing Director, Sales Training IQ, [email protected].

Kimberley Mackey (Bachelor of Management Science, University of Waikato, New Zealand), Marketing Communications and Events Coordinator, Combined Insurance Limited, [email protected].

Volume 14, Number 1

21

Jagodic 2012). Hence, the overall purpose of the research

reported upon in this paper is to explore and profile the

key training and coaching characteristics associated with

an effective induction program for new sales recruits

in the financial services industry. Specifically, through

comparing and contrasting the induction programs

used by higher and lower performing financial services

companies competing directly with each other in the

same marketplace, the research aims to:

1. Identify the key determinants of “best practice”

when running an effective sales training program for

new recruits.

2. Identify the key determinants of “best practice”

when running an effective sales coaching program

for new recruits.

A research spotlight on the financial services industry

can be viewed as both timely and appropriate for a

number of reasons. Most notably, in the wake of the 2008

global financial crisis, financial services companies

around the world have been facing an extraordinarily

difficult strategic environment (Akinbami 2011;

Heckl and Moormann 2010). Like other businesses,

they have had to navigate their way amid widespread

economic recession and some of the most difficult

trading conditions on record (Mayer-Foulkes 2009).

However, in many respects their macroenvironmental

situation has been especially challenging. Under the

microscope of much public scrutiny and some criticism

of their operational norms, in most Western financial

markets there has been a power shift towards political

and regulatory bodies, all of which has led to a newly

regulated external business environment (Chambers

2010; Lempka and Stallard 2013; Steel 2013). In

addition, and primarily due to the Eurozone crisis, a

financial power shift from “West” to “East” is currently

underway, with new financial services organizations

from countries such as China and South Korea further

intensifying what is already an ultra-competitive and

increasingly internationally competitive marketplace

(Cox 2012; Gritten 2011; Hosono, Sakai and Tsuru

2009). Further, unlike many other types of businesses,

within a financial services business the selling function

typically integrates both horizontally and vertically

across all market segments served as well as all of the

various divisions or operating units of the organization

(Farquhar and Meidan 2010; Steel 2013; Thuring

et al. 2012). Consequently, for a financial services

company, the personal selling function directly affects

virtually every single customer’s buying experience

(Rajaobelina and Bergeron 2009). As such, personal

selling plays a uniquely crucial role within a financial

service company’s overall marketing strategy. Indeed,

throughout the industry it is widely regarded as being

a key driver of long-term business success (Brenkert

2011; Drew, Walk and Bianchi 2013).

In light of the above it is arguable that across the

financial services industry of today, as companies

grapple to maintain market share and seek to re-establish

themselves within the turbulent “new era” of financial

services marketing, an efficient and effective selling

effort is more important than ever before. Thus, with

these issues in mind, attention next turns to a baseline

review of the literature relating to sales training and

sales coaching. After this, the exploratory methodology

employed in this research is explained, followed by a

presentation of the research findings, conclusions, and

practitioner implications.

literAtUre revieW

In order to more accurately define the mix of teaching

and learning methods involved in a sales induction

program, it is useful to differentiate between two distinct

subcomponents or categories of activities, both of which

are typically employed to a greater or lesser extent: 1)

a sales “training program,” and; 2) a sales “coaching

program” (Lambert 2009a, 2009b). The term “training

program” refers to a planned and formally organized group

activity aimed at imparting information and instructions

to facilitate participants’ acquisition of a required level of

sales-related knowledge (Mackey 2013). The perceived

importance of such training among practitioners is well

documented (Steel 2013). Indeed, it is estimated that U.S.

companies, for example, spend $7.1 billion annually on

training programs and devote more than 33 hours per

year training the average salesperson (Lorge 1998). This

figure increases to 73.4 training days for an average

entry-level sales representative (Kaydo 1998), and in

technical markets (e.g., computers, imaging systems, and

chemicals), the costs associated with the development of

a single salesperson can exceed $100,000 (Dubinsky

1996; Johnston and Marshall 2009). Today more than

Journal of Selling


ever, salespeople must have a working knowledge across

numerous topics in order to meet increasing customer

expectations (e.g., changes in market dynamics, business

enabling technologies, and business ethics) and firms are

utilizing training programs to achieve and maintain high

levels of salesperson competence in these areas (Galvin

2001; Steel 2013).

Moreover, many firms are using a variety of

training evaluation procedures in order to gauge the

effectiveness of such programs (Mackey 2013). These

range from self-administered reports completed by

the trainees, to informal debriefing sessions, to more

elaborate calculations of enhanced sales revenue (Attia,

Honeycutt and Leach 2005). Certainly, the information

and feedback emanating from such evaluation

procedures can be considered as central to the

successful implementation of strategic organizational

initiatives (Moore and Seidner 1998). However, it

is noteworthy that over recent years little empirical

research that ties sales training (either that which is

included within an induction program or that which is

carried out on an ongoing basis) to performance has

been undertaken (Attia, Honeycutt and Attia 2002;

Hill and Allaway 1993; Lassk et al. 2012), although

managerial perceptions certainly tend to support the

efficacy of such endeavors (Jantan et al. 2004).

In contrast to sales training, a “coaching program” is

concerned with helping each individual salesperson

embark upon a journey of self-improvement within

an on-the-job, results-oriented context, and through

a process of ongoing one-on-one conversations and

dialogue with their coach (Mosca, Fazzari and Buzza

2010; Somers 2012). Here, an analogy is often drawn

between the competitive worlds of sports and business

sales. Just as an athlete must compete against opposing

players to win games, salespeople compete against

other companies’ salespeople to win accounts (Rich

1998). As such, rather like the athletic coach, the sales

manager plays a similarly critical role in developing the

skills of his or her sales team. In fact, the extent to which

athletic success stems from natural ability is usually

unquestioned, while sales management textbooks often

report the idea of the natural-born salesperson as myth

(e.g., Stanton, Buskirk and Spiro 1991).

Many salespeople reach their full potential through

effective coaching and supervision activities that involve

continual guidance and feedback by the sales manager

at “branch” level (Rich 1998), and practitioners widely

recognize this sales coaching process to be critical to

the competitive success of the firm (Agarwal, Angst and

Magni 2009; Corcoran et al. 1995; Dubinsky and Barry

1982; Mosca, Fazzari and Buzza 2010; Richardson

2009). Accordingly, it is therefore surprising to note

that few empirical studies into the beneficial effects of

sales coaching on productivity have been reported in the

literature. Interestingly however, in the wider domain of

executive coaching, Olivero et al. (1997) have reported

that coaching (which included goal setting, problem

solving, practice, feedback, supervisory involvement,

evaluation of end results, and public presentation)

increased productivity fourfold over training alone.

Moreover, in this particular context (executive

coaching in a public sector municipal agency), the

authors proposed a qualitative difference in the type of

learning that takes place in training and coaching, each

phase serving a unique purpose. Whereas the training

provided a period of abstract learning principles, the

coaching facilitated concrete involvement in a project

specific to each participant’s work unit (Olivero, Bane

and Kopelman 1997). Thus, in this case, some attempt

was made by the authors to distinguish the objectives

and outcomes of training versus coaching.

Similarly, Bright and Crockett (2012) sought to

evaluate the beneficial effects of a classroom-based

training session followed by an individual coaching

session directed at healthcare executives. The

researchers reported a significant difference in an

experimental group (that had received training plus

coaching), compared to a control group (that did

not receive training and coaching) in their ability to

identify solutions to issues that positively impacted

their work responsibilities, their effectiveness when

under pressure, their heightened capacity to deal with

changing priorities, and a greater effectiveness in

dealing with tight deadlines. The experimental group

also showed an increased adeptness for articulating

ideas more clearly and concisely when compared to the

control group.

Volume 14, Number 1

23

In summary, a review of the literature reveals that

historically, research has focused on (sales) training and

coaching as discrete endeavours. Further, it seems there

have been no empirical studies designed to tease out the

relative contribution of each to sales performance nor

has there been any research that seeks to elucidate any

potential synergistic effects of training and coaching

within the context of a salesperson induction program.

MetHODOlOGY

For decades, a methodological precedent has been

established whereby a variety of authors (e.g., Gardner

and Levy 1955; Gill and Johnson 1991; Mintzberg

1979; November 2004; Tapp 2004; Wells 1993) have

argued that the best way to study business practice is

“from the inside” such that researchers get “closer to

the action” and consequently gain meaningful insights

into how companies go about doing what they do.

This insider’s perspective typically manifests through

qualitative models of research design, often inspired

by interpretive, naturalistic and immersive methods

(Arnould and Wallendorf 1994; Fetterman 2010; Guba

and Lincoln 1994; Hirschman 1986; Lincoln and Guba

1985; Polkinghorne 1989). Accordingly, this paper

reports the findings obtained from exploratory, depth

interviews conducted in late 2012 and early 2013 with

senior executives, at the director and vice president

levels, with responsibility for business development,

sales force management and sales force training in four

large financial services companies.

Research participants were recruited via two matched

pairs of companies (one defined as “low-performing”

and the other as “high performing”) competing head-to-

head in seeking to serve essentially the same market(s)

with a similar range of financial product/service

offerings: one matched pair being located in the United

Kingdom and the other in New Zealand. The use of

matched pairs as the basis for a comparative study is

a form of research design that is well established (cf.

Brooksbank and Taylor 2007; Doyle, Saunders and

Wong 1985) and was chosen because it is a model that

allows for a sharp contrast to be drawn between the

induction programs of higher and lower performing

firms competing with one another in the same market.

Note as well that per dicta of qualitative methodologies

(Creswell 2003; Krueger 2008; McCracken 1988),

a relatively small number of in-depth participant

interactions is typically sufficient to generate enough

data to ascertain the pertinent elements (i.e. the

“phenomenological essence” or “core categories”)

of an investigated social-psychological phenomenon.

Therefore, a quest for representative “sample size” that

might achieve statistical conclusion validity (i.e. an

effort more germane to hypothetico-deductive research

paradigms) was not pursued.

The four participant companies were selected using

a three-step process. The first step involved asking a

knowledgeable and experienced “industry expert” in

each country to compile a short list of companies to

approach (two likely high performers and two likely

low performers all competing against each other in

the same marketplace). The second step entailed

contacting these firms by telephone and email with an

invitation to respond initially to a short questionnaire,

with the promise that information given would be kept

confidential. In essence, the questionnaire attempted to

ascertain two main pieces of information: (i) the extent

to which each company carried out at least some form of

induction program for new sales recruits, and whether

this program had exceeded, met, or failed to meet its

overall objectives during the previous financial year,

and; (ii) how the company had performed during the

previous financial year relative to its major competitors

(“better,” “the same,” “worse,” or “don’t know”) and

against four specified performance measures: profit,

sales volume, market share and return on investment.

Notably, this type of performance measurement has

been previously employed by other researchers such as

Hooley and Lynch (1985) and Law et al. (1998) and

although self-reported measures of relative performance

have the potential to contain bias, these and other

authors contend that in the absence of objective criteria,

they can be both appropriate and reliable (Dess and

Robinson 1984; Matear and Garrett 2004). Thus, by

using the answers given in the questionnaire as a filter,

the third and final step in the process involved inviting

executives from one self-reported high performing

company and one self-reported low performer in each

matched pair (one pair based in the United Kingdom

and the other based in New Zealand) to participate in a

follow-up interview.

Journal of Selling


The self-reported performance characteristics for each

“matched pair” of firms are shown in Table 1. In a

tact similar to Ferrell et al. (2010), subsequent depth

interviews with executive participants lasted from 60

to 75 minutes each, with the scope of inquiry aimed

largely at encompassing the phenomena of both broad

and specific characteristics about each participating

company’s planning and execution of their sales training

and sales coaching induction program activities. These

depth interviews were facilitated by a semi-structured,

discovery-oriented interview guidelines developed in the

FiNDiNGs

Best practice for running an effective sales training program

In the questionnaire, all four participating companies

reported that they conducted a formal, classroom-

based sales training program for their new recruits. The

depth interviews further revealed that typically, these

programs were run at least twice per year, are of 5-10

days in duration, included a cohort of 8-15 trainees,

and are ideally held within the first few weeks of a new

recruit’s job commencement. Indeed, in these areas

there were no obvious differences between the higher

and lower performers. Interestingly, however, whereas

28

Table 1: Self Reported Sample Performance Characteristics

High Performer Low Performer

UK Matched Pair

Induction program objectives “met.” Performed “better” than its major competitors across the measures specified.

Failed to meet induction program objectives. Performed the “same” or “worse” than major competitors across the measures specified.

NZ Matched Pair

Induction program objectives “exceeded.” Performed “better” than its major competitors across the measures specified.

Failed to meet its induction program objectives. Performed “worse” (or “don’t know”) than major competitors across the measures specified.

tradition of both broad, initial “grand tour” techniques

(Fetterman 2010; McCracken 1988) and more specific

and acute phenomenological inquiry (Kvale 1983;

Polkinghorne 1989; Rader 2007; Thompson, Locander

and Pollio 1989). Interviewees steered the conversations

(Morrison, Haley and Sheehan 2002) in a flexible and

“informal, interactive process” utilizing “open-ended

comments and questions” (Moustakas 1994, p. 114).

Responses were recorded and transcribed for analysis.

Selected supporting verbatim extracts are included in

the body of the paper.

executives from the lower performing companies said

they outsourced a trainer/instructor on an as-required

basis, by contrast, it seems the higher performers prefer

to use in-house trainers: one or more staff members who

typically carry out this duty from time to time alongside

their other functional responsibilities within corporate

business development. As one executive explained:

We like to use our own people, usually senior

managers who have been there done that...we don’t

want some off the peg, once size fits all course

that’s the same as all the rest.... it’s a matter of

branding, credibility and being the best.

Volume 14, Number 1

25

When asked to identify the key objectives for their sales

training program three of the four interviewees were

unable to specify precise metrics. For both the lower

performers, training objectives were largely relegated

to the seemingly obvious need for recruits to be able to

“learn how to do their new job” whereas in the case of

the other higher performer, at least it was claimed that

training objectives were “under review.” Perhaps this

overall profile of response was somewhat surprising

in light of the widely received view in learning and

pedagogy theory that objectives are paramount to the

success of any educational/training curriculum (Bloom

1956; Dean et al. 2012; Mager 1997). However, one

executive from a high performing firm was much more

forthcoming and explicit in her response to the question

relating to setting training objectives. She explained

that by the end of her company’s formal sales training

program, all new recruits will have taken a series of

tests to prove that they could recall and comprehend key

information to “an acceptable level,” further elaborating:

Pretty much the sole purpose of our training

program is the acquisition of basic knowledge...

from there, professional skills can go on to be

developed and finessed.

As might have been expected, one of the most important

elements of an effective sales training program, according

to all four interviewees, related to the need to design

program content in a logical, progressive, step-by-step

sequence. There was also general agreement about the

key topic areas to cover, which included the following:

product knowledge, industry knowledge, customer and

market knowledge; the sales process (incorporating

a range of selling skills, tools and techniques such

as interviewing, presenting, benefit selling, closing

and objection-handling); new business prospecting

methods; customer service and relationship building

procedures; and self-management. Nonetheless, the

interviews did indicate that the higher performers were

differentiated from their lower performing counterparts

by their inclusion of an additional topic: the provision of

a detailed understanding of the sales coaching process

that was planned to follow-up and build upon the initial

sales training program inputs. As one executive put it:

Our recruits need to know that learning doesn’t

stop when the formal training is over... they also

need to understand what’s going to happen next

when they get to meet their field manager and all

the ins and outs of how they’re going to be managed

and coached to become superstars.

Interestingly, another topic highlighted by one

interviewee from a higher performing company

(although not by any of the others), was the need to

spend sufficient time on introducing new recruits to

their company’s culture. Culture was described as

referring to the company’s traditions, values, beliefs,

and ethics. In their own words, in short:

Right from the start, every new staff member has

to understand how we do things around here... it’s

what defines us.

This interviewee went on to explain that this part of the

training program was now considered essential in the

post-global financial crisis era because of the imperative

for his company to strive to conduct its business to the

highest possible professional standards, and to facilitate

its ability to attract and retain people of excellence.

Another strong theme of agreement among all

interviewees related to the need to ensure that the

program encompassed a wide range of delivery methods

conducive to a “classroom” environment, on the basis

that this serves to accommodate the many different

preferred learning styles among trainees. Methods

highlighted included traditional “chalk and talk”

teaching alongside group discussion and brainstorming

sessions, individual and group exercises, films, role-

plays, online games and simulations, and such like.

However, upon further questioning, it became apparent

that with regard to the use and application of computer

technology, the higher performers were well ahead

of their counterparts. Both the interviewees from the

higher performing companies explained in detail and

with some enthusiasm that their companies had recently

developed, or were at least currently in the process

of developing, a dedicated intranet-based learning

environment. The logic behind these initiatives was

succinctly articulated when one executive commented:

Journal of Selling


We’ve read the tea leaves just like everybody else.

So the future is a fully integrated online-offline

learning environment that promotes ongoing

self-improvement, interfaces with line managers’

performance reviews, with HR, and does the whole

nine yards.

Thus, with specific regard to the role this system

plays in the sales training room, in simple terms it

provides a convenient, centrally accessible source of

backup teaching and learning support materials such as

course notes, fact sheets, checklists, workbooks, self-

evaluation tools, video clips and so on. Its real value,

however, was much more that of being an “enabling”

technology (Lambert 2009a), providing a means by

which each trainee’s subsequent experiences of being

coached on-the-job could, over time, benefit from

previous training inputs and via a process of ongoing

application and evaluation, help turn them into well-

honed practical skills and behaviors.

Best practice for running an effective sales coaching program

In the questionnaire, the four participating companies

had indicated that their company’s induction course

included some form of sales coaching program.

Indeed, the interviews revealed that although the

term “coaching” meant different things to different

companies, all four companies viewed it as a critically

important “in the field” follow-up, complementary

activity, to their sales training program -- and one that

made up the remainder of a set induction program lasting

either three months (one, lower performing company)

or six months (one lower performing and the two

higher performing companies). Interestingly, however,

for the lower performing companies it seems that at the

conclusion of this period the new recruit was deemed

to have successfully “passed” their probationary period

simply on the authority of their field office/branch

manager. By contrast, the interviewees from the higher

performing companies insisted that achieving the status

of a “professional XXXXX” (read here the formal

job title used by each company) was dependent upon

adherence to a strict assessment procedure including,

in both cases, the results of a formal customer service

satisfaction survey completed by clients, together with

the systematic review of various written assessments

and progress reports. As one interviewee asserted:

It’s no cake walk. Our recruits know exactly what

hoops they have to jump through before they

can consider themselves to be a graduate of our

academy.

As indicated earlier, the interviews also revealed that the

higher performing companies were differentiated from

their lower performing counterparts by their depth of

understanding and application of the term “coaching.”

In fact, for the lower performers it was seemingly an

extremely loosely defined term that merely meant their

office/branch sales manager had been assigned the task

of “showing a new recruit the ropes” often by taking

him or her out with them on customer visits so that

they could learn by “sitting next to Nellie” and/or quite

simply, as one interviewee stated:

It requires always being on the spot to offer further

information, advice, support, guidance and so forth.

In sharp contrast, an executive from a higher performing

firm commented:

Being a coach is not the same as being a manager.

It’s a different set of skills that our managers have

to learn in order that they can perform the role [of

a coach] to the benefit of each new staff member.

Indeed, for this high performer the coaching role might

be characterized as “textbook” in that it was described

by an executive to be an experiential-based, facilitated

self-learning process, necessitating that the coach

encourages and challenges his or her recruit to develop

their own ever-evolving learning goals and sales targets.

The coach here helps them to analyse, plan, implement

and evaluate incremental improvements to their overall

skill set as time goes by. Interestingly, it also became

apparent that (at least for the company that was using

its own purpose-built online learning platform), each

coach was expected to post regular progress reports so

that whenever a need arose for additional training on a

specific topic, it could easily be spotted and a dedicated,

short (half or one day) in-house training course could

be arranged in a timely fashion.

Volume 14, Number 1

27

In view of the combination of findings reported above,

perhaps it was not too surprising that when the four

interviewees were asked to identify the main objectives

of their company’s sales coaching program, the

executives from the higher performing companies were

noticeably more assertive in explicating their response.

For them, during the first few weeks and months of work,

coaching was a means to help cultivate and develop all

the necessary skills of the profession, systematically

attempting to apply all the tools and techniques that had

been learned in the classroom. Moreover, an important

secondary objective was to develop the skills of self

analysis so that each recruit was empowered to become

a lifelong self-learner. As one interviewee put it:

Ultimately, we want our people to be all they are

capable of becoming, and more!

Despite a number of clear differences in the role that

sales coaching played among our four participating

companies (and notwithstanding the differences in their

understanding of the term itself), the interviews did

reveal one commonly held perception about the nature of

an effective sales coaching program. All four executives

stressed that it was up to every new recruit to drive

the process. For each recruit, the intrinsic motivation

to want to be a success, and the willingness to accept

full responsibility and accountability for making the

coaching process an effective one, is paramount.

cONclUsiONs AND MANAGeriAl reseArcH

This study has served to validate much of the

conventional wisdom typically espoused in the

literature about the nature of effective sales training

(Attia, Honeycutt and Leach 2005; Ricks, Williams

and Weeks 2008). In particular, the balance of the

reported evidence suggests that when planning and

executing a sales training program it is important to:

set clear objectives that relate primarily to knowledge

acquisition; employ a structured curriculum (to cover

company knowledge, product knowledge, industry

knowledge, market knowledge, the selling process,

new business prospecting methods, customer service/

relationship building procedures, self-management,

and the coaching process), adopt a timeline long

enough to enable trainees to fully engage in the learning

experience; employ a range of pedagogical delivery

techniques that cater to varied learning styles; provide

trainees with plenty of supporting documentation, and;

check that knowledge transfer is actually occurring at

frequent intervals throughout the program.

However, a number of other key success factors have

emerged that appear to be uniquely associated with

the training activities of the higher performers. For

example, it might well be preferable to use in-house

trainers/instructors who will have credibility in the

eyes of trainees by virtue of a track record of sales

achievement. It might also be necessary to ensure two

extra items are included in the training agenda: 1) the

provision of a thorough appreciation of the importance

of, and the processes involved in, the company’s on-

the-job sales coaching program that typically follows

as part of the overall salesperson induction period,

and; 2) the provision of a thorough understanding of

the company’s “culture,” especially those aspects of the

company’s operations that are required to be in keeping

with the customer-centric ethical standards that are

widely expected to be upheld in today’s marketplace.

Another distinctive dimension of the higher performers’

training activities lies in the area of technology. It seems

that a purpose-built online learning environment is

integral to their ability to enable each trainee, his or her

line manager/coach, and others within the company, to

maximize the exchange of information about progress

made to the mutual benefit of all parties. The successful

adoption of such computer technologies (for use in sales

training programs) may also be indicative of a changing

workforce, increasingly comprised of “digital natives”

who feel at ease with computer-mediated learning

modalities (Palfrey and Gasser 2013).

The study findings have also served to validate much

of the conventional wisdom typically espoused in the

literature about the nature of effective sales coaching

(cf. Graham and Renshaw 2005; Rosen 2008). In

particular, it has highlighted the very different, yet

entirely complementary, role that a sales coaching

program plays when compared with a sales training

program, as summarized in Table 2.

Certainly, the interviews served to confirm that when

running a sales coaching program, some of the basic

success factors to observe include: the setting of

clear objectives and especially those that relate to the

Journal of Selling


cultivation of selling skills and self-appraisal; the need for a coach to be constantly questioning, encouraging and

challenging their recruits to develop their own ever-evolving learning goals and sales targets and to provide them

with ongoing feedback and progress reports, and; the requirement for the recruit to be a self-starter and take full

responsibility and accountability for their learning as time goes by. Perhaps the most important and distinctive attribute

associated with the higher performers, however, is the extent to which they have sought to properly integrate and align

their sales coaching activities with their sales training activities. As the diagram in Figure 1 attempts to illustrate,

it seems that the higher performers model the whole of their induction program on an underlying logic that can be

directly related to, and explained by, Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy of learning domains.

29

Table 2: Key Features of Sales Training Versus Sales Coaching

Sales Training Program Sales Coaching Program

Infrequent / occasional Frequent / on-going

Generalized to sales team Individualized one on one

Knowledge acquisition focus Skill acquisition focus

Classroom-based learning Experiential-based learning

Fixed / planned agenda Dynamic / adaptive agenda

Instructor - led Salesperson - led

Mandatory Voluntary

Shorter term goals Longer term goals

30

Figure 1: An Integrated Sales Training/Coaching Model

29

Table 2: Key Features of Sales Training Versus Sales Coaching

Sales Training Program Sales Coaching Program

Infrequent / occasional Frequent / on-going

Generalized to sales team Individualized one on one

Knowledge acquisition focus Skill acquisition focus

Classroom-based learning Experiential-based learning

Fixed / planned agenda Dynamic / adaptive agenda

Instructor - led Salesperson - led

Mandatory Voluntary

Shorter term goals Longer term goals

30

Figure 1: An Integrated Sales Training/Coaching Model

Volume 14, Number 1

29

As Figure 1 indicates, at the outset of the induction

program the new recruit requires an almost exclusive

focus on basic knowledge acquisition and the ability

to be able to recall that knowledge (i.e., those domains

that relate to the lower levels of Bloom’s taxonomy)

in order to provide a strong platform for his or her

future development. Then, as time goes by and they

gain on-the-job experience, sales coaching assumes

an increasingly more important role in taking the

salesperson to the next level (i.e., the development of

selling skills through knowledge application). To put it

another way, it would appear that the higher performers

aim to pursue an appropriate and evolving balance

of both sales training and coaching throughout the

duration of their induction programs -- ideally all the

way through to a conclusion which leaves the recruit

capable of ongoing independent learning, having by

this time reached, at least in theory, the highest levels

of Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy (i.e., the skills of analysis,

synthesis and evaluation).

These conclusions give rise to a number of implications

for practitioners. It is advised that senior executives at

the director and vice president level with responsibility

for sales force management and training undertake a

comprehensive appraisal of their firm’s salesperson

induction program in order to ensure that it aligns with

the key determinants of best practice identified above.

In particular, attention should be focussed upon the

following areas. Firstly, an evaluation of the formal

“sales training” component of the firm’s induction

program should be conducted. This evaluation should

review all aspects of the firm’s training program,

including: its stated objectives; the mix, timing and

sequencing of topics covered; the range of teaching and

learning activities employed, assessment procedures,

and; the type of documentation and other supporting

materials offered. Secondly, an evaluation of the

“sales coaching” component of the firm’s induction

program should be undertaken. For many managers it is

envisaged that this evaluation might well reveal a need

to attach more importance to the role that sales coaching

plays within their firm’s induction program. In such

cases it might even be necessary to question the firms’

prevailing culture with respect to salesperson learning

and development since the evidence reported in this

study strongly indicates that effective coaching can only

flourish within a supportive and enabling environment.

Certainly, an audit of each sales manager’s ability to

effectively coach their staff should be conducted, with

a view to upgrading knowledge and skills as necessary.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, the degree to

which the firm’s training and coaching activities are

properly integrated and aligned requires consideration.

Here it will be necessary to revise the overall objectives

of the firms’ induction program. Again, using Bloom’s

(1956) taxonomy of learning as a guide (see Figure 1), the

aim should be to ensure that all elements of the program

are geared towards encouraging new recruits to build

a long term career in sales by “learning how to learn”

(Argyris 1991). In pursuit of this goal, a review of the

firm’s technological infrastructure is also recommended.

The deployment of technology as a means of enhancing

all aspects of the leaning process was found to be a key

success factor that clearly differentiated the induction

programs of the higher performers in our sample from

those of their lower performing counterparts.

liMitAtiONs AND FUtUre reseArcH

Despite the attributes of the adopted methodology, this

study’s findings should nonetheless be viewed in light

of a number of potential limitations. As is the case with

much social-psychological research, the validity of

self-reporting should be kept in mind. That is to say,

when questions are used in personal interview studies,

researchers are limited by the respondents’ willingness

to answer such questions in a forthright manner.

However, since the topics covered in the interviews

were not of a sensitive nature, concern for the accuracy

of the responses may be less of an issue in this case.

Another limitation relates to the generalizability of the

findings given the small representation of participants.

If findings were to be inferred to a greater population

then an additional, larger study, using quantitative

methods would need to be pursued (i.e. likely survey-

based research). Equally an issue meriting further

inquiry relates to the generalizability of the findings to

firms outside the United Kingdom and New Zealand.

Although there is no reason to suspect that executives in

companies outside these territories might adopt different

or contrary perspectives, clearly the findings in the

study might more readily impute to countries exhibiting

similar social, regulatory and economic profiles.

Journal of Selling


From an academic perspective, this study also indicates

that more research into this much neglected arena is

needed. For example, further qualitative research could

usefully examine, in greater depth than the present

study, the underlying “how-to-do–its” of effective

sales coaching, including the various ways and means

by which it can be best integrated and aligned with a

company’s sales training activities. Equally useful would

be a follow-up, survey-based (i.e., quantitative) research

program designed to validate this study’s findings

both within and beyond the financial services industry.

Providing this research retains a practical focus it would

likely prove to be extremely valuable in serving to raise

standards across the sales profession, and to the ultimate

benefit of customers, salespeople, businesses and society.

reFereNces

Aberdeen Group (2012), “Train, Coach, Reinforce, Best Practices in Maximising Sales Productivity,” Aberdeen Group Research Library Vault.

Adamson, Brent, Matthew Dixon, and Nicholas N. Toman (2012), “The End of Solution Sales,” Harvard Business Review (July-August), 61-68.

Agarwal, Ritu, Corey M. Angst, and Massimo Magni (2009), “The Performance Effects of Coaching: A Multilevel Analysis Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling,” The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20 (10), 2110-2134.

Akinbami, Folarin (2011), “Financial Services and Consumer Protection after the Crisis,” International Journal of Bank Marketing, 29 (2), 134-147.

Argyris, Chris (1991), “Teaching Smart People How to Learn,” Reflections, 4 (2), 4-15.

Arnould, Eric J. and Melanie Wallendorf (1994), “Market-Oriented Ethnography: Interpretation Building and Marketing Strategy Formulation,” Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (November), 484-504.

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

Attia, Ashraf M., Earl D. Honeycutt, and Mark P. Leach (2005), “A Three-Stage Model for Assessing and Improving Sales Force Training and Development,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 25 (3), 253-268.

Bloom, Benjamin S. (1956), Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co, Inc.

Boehle, Sarah (2010), “Global Sales Training’s Balancing Act,” Training (January), 29-31.

Brenkert, George G. (2011), “Marketing of Financial Services,” in Finance Ethics: Critical Issues in Theory and Practice, John R. Boatright and George G. Brenkert, Eds. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons.

Bright, Deborah and Anita Crockett (2012), “Training Combined with Coaching Can Make a Significant Difference in Job Performance and Satisfaction,” Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 5 (1), 1-18.

Brooksbank, Roger and David Taylor (2007), “Strategic Marketing in Action: A Comparison of Higher and Lower Performing Manufacturing Firms in the UK,” Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 25 (1), 31-44.

Callender, Guy and Kevin P. Reid (1993), Australian Sales Management. Melbourne, Australia.

Chambers, Clare (2010), “Banking on Reform in 2010: Is Regulatory Change Ever Enough and Will the General Election Hold the Answers for the Financial Services Industry?,” The Law Teacher, 44 (2), 218-234.

Corcoran, Kevin J., Laura K. Petersen, Daniel B. Baitch, and Mark F. Barrett (1995), High Performance Sales Organizations: Achieving Competitive Advantage in the Global Marketplace. Irwin, New York.

Cox, Michael (2012), “Power Shifts, Economic Change and the Decline of the West?,” International Relations, 26 (4), 369-388.

Creswell, John W. (2003), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Dean, Ceri B., Elizabeth R. Hubbell, Howard Pitler, and B. J. Stone (2012), Classroom Instruction That Works: Research-Based Strategies (2nd ed.). Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Dess, Gregory and Richard Robinson (1984), “Measuring Organizational Performance in the Absence of Objective Measures: The Case of Privately Held Firms and Conglomerate Business Units,” Strategic Management Journal, 5 (3), 264-273.

Volume 14, Number 1

31

Doyle, Peter, John Saunders, and Veronica Wong (1985), “Investigation of Japanese Marketing Strategies in the British Market,” Report to the Economic and Scientific Research Council.

Drew, Michael, Adam Walk, and Robert Bianchi (2013), “Financial Product Complexity and the Limits of Financial Literacy: A Special Issue of the Journal of Financial Services Marketing,” Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 18 (3), 153-157.

Dubinsky, Alan J. and Thomas E. Barry (1982), “A Survey of Sales Management Practices,” Industrial Marketing Management, 11 (2), 133-141.

Dubinsky, Alan J. (1996), “Some Assumptions About the Effectiveness of Sales Training,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 16 (3), 67-76.

Ennew, Christine and Nigel Waite (2012), Financial Services Marketing: An International Guide to Principles and Practice (1st ed.). New York: Routledge.

Farquhar, Jillian and Arthur Meidan (2010), Marketing Financial Services (2nd ed.). Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Ferrell, Linda, Tracy L. Gonzalez-Padron, and O. C. Ferrell (2010), “An Assessment of the Use of Technology in the Direct Selling Industry,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 30 (2), 157-165.

Fetterman, David M. (2010), Ethnography (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Fogel, Suzanne, David Hoffmeister, Richard Rocco, and Daniel Strunk (2012), “Teaching Sales,” Harvard Business Review (July-August), 94-99.

Futrrell, Charles M. (2005), Abc’s of Relationship Selling through Service. Irwin, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Galvin, Tammy (2001), “Training Industry Report 2001,” Training, 38 (10), 40-65.

Gardner, Burleigh B. and Sidney J. Levy (1955), “The Product and the Brand,” Harvard Business Review, 33 (2), 33-39.

Gill, John and Philip Johnson (1991), Research Methods for Managers (2nd ed.). London: Paul Chapman.

Graham, Alexander and Ben Renshaw (2005), Super Coaching: The Missing Ingredient for High Performance. London: Random House.

Gritten, Adéle (2011), “New Insights into Consumer Confidence in Financial Services,” International Journal of Bank Marketing, 29 (2), 90-106.

Guba, Egon G. and Yvonna S. Lincoln (1994), “Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research,” in Handbook of Qualitative Research, Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, Eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Heckl, Diana and Jurgen Moormann (2010), “Operational Process Management in the Financial Services Industry,” in Handbook of Research on Complex Dynamic Process Management Techniques for Adaptability in Turbulent Environments, Minhong Wang and Zhaohao Sun, Eds. Hershey, PA: Business Science Reference.

Hill, John S. and Arthur W. Allaway (1993), “How U.S.-Based Companies Manage Sales in Foreign Countries,” Industrial Marketing Management, 22 (1), 7-16.

Hirschman, Elizabeth C. (1986), “Humanistic Inquiry in Marketing Research: Philosophy, Method, and Criteria,” Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 23 (3), 237-249.

Hooley, Graham J. and James E. Lynch (1985), “Marketing Lesson from the UK’s High-Flying Companies “ Journal of Marketing Management, 1 (1), 65-74.

Hosono, Kaoru, Koji Sakai, and Kotaro Tsuru (2009), “Consolidation of Banks in Japan: Causes and Consequences,” RIETI Discussion Paper, 07-E-059.

Jagodic, Gregor (2012), “Effectiveness of Communication in Relation to Training of Sales Staff,” in Management, Knowledge and Learning International Conference. Celje, Slovenia.

Jantan, Asri, Earl D. Honeycutt, Shawn Thelen, and Ashraf M. Attia (2004), “Managerial Perceptions of Sales Training and Performance,” Industrial Marketing Management, 33 (7), 667-673.

Johnston, Mark W. and Greg W. Marshall (2009), Relationship Selling and Sales Management (3rd ed.). Irwin, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Kaishev, Vladimir. K., Jens P. Nielsen, and Fredrik Thuring (2013), “Optimal Customer Selection for Cross-Selling of Financial Services Products,” Expert Systems with Applications, 40 (5), 1748-1757.

Kaydo, Chad (1998), “Should You Speed up Sales Training,” Sales and Marketing Management, 150 (10), 33.

Krueger, Richard A. (2008), Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Journal of Selling


Kvale, Steinar (1983), “The Qualitative Research Interview: A Phenomenological and Hermeneutical Mode of Understanding,” Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 14 (2), 171-196.

Lambert, Brian (2009a), “Barriers to Appropriate Sales Training,” Training and Development, 64 (6), 22.

Lambert, Brian (2009b), “Sales Training Takes Center Stage,” Training and Development, 3 (6), 62-63.

Lassk, Felicia G., Thomas N. Ingram, Florian Kraus, and Rita Di Mascio (2012), “The Future of Sales Training: Challenges and Related Research Questions,” Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 32 (1), 141-154.

Law, Kenneth S., Chi-Sum Wong, and William H. Mobley (1998), “Toward a Taxonomy of Multidimensional Constructs,” Academy of Management Review, 24 (4), 741-755.

Lempka, Robert and Paul D. Stallard (2013), Next Generation Finance: Adapting the Financial Services Industry to Changes in Technology, Regulation and Consumer Behaviour. Hampshire, UK: Harriman House.

Lincoln, Yvonna S. and Egon G. Guba (1985), “Designing a Naturalistic Inquiry,” in Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Lorge, Sarah (1998), “Getting into Their Heads,” Sales and Marketing Management, 150 (February), 58-64.

Mackey, Kimberley (2013), “An Investigation into the Salesperson’s Induction Program,” Unpublished Master’s Dissertation, University of Waikato.

Mager, Robert F. (1997), Preparing Instructional Objectives: A Critical Tool in the Development of Effective Instruction (3rd ed.). Atlanta, Georgia: Center for Effective Performance

Martini, Nancy (2012), Scientific Selling: Creating High Performance Teams through Applied Psychology and Testing. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Matear, Sheelagh M., Tony Garrett, and Brendon J. Gray (2004), “Market Orientation, Brand Investment, New Service Development, Market Position, and Performance for Service Organisations,” International Journal of Service Industry Management, 15 (3), 284-301.

Mayer-Foulkes, David A. (2009), “Long-Term Fundamentals of the 2008 Economic Crisis,” Global Economy Journal, 9 (4).

McCracken, Grant (1988), The Long Interview. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Mintzberg, Henry (1979), “An Emerging Strategy of Direct Research,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 24 (4), 582-589.

Moore, Carol A. and Constance J. Seidner (1998), “Organizational Strategy and Training Evaluation,” in Evaluating Corporate Training: Models and Issues, Stephen M. Brown and Constance J. Seidner, Eds. Vol. 46.

Morrison, Margaret A., J. Eric Haley, and Kim Bartel Sheehan (2002), Using Qualitative Research in Advertising. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Mosca, Joseph B., Alan Fazzari, and John Buzza (2010), “Coaching to Win: A Systematic Approach to Achieving Productivity through Coaching,” Journal of Business Economics Research, 8 (5), 115-130.

Moustakas, Clark (1994), Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

November, Peter (2004), “Seven Reasons Why Marketing Practitioners Should Ignore Marketing Academic Research,” Australian Marketing Journal, 12 (2), 39-50.

Olivero, Gerald, K. Denise Bane, and Richard E. Kopelman (1997), “Executive Coaching as a Transfer of Training Tool: Effects on Productivity in a Public Agency,” Public Personnel Management, 26 (4), 461-470.

Palfrey, John G. and Urs Gasser (2013), Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. New York: Perseus Books Group.

Polkinghorne, Donald E. (1989), “Phenomenological Research Methods,” in Existential Phenomenology Perspectives in Psychology, Ronald S. Valle and Steen Halling, Eds. Vol. 41-60. New York: Plenum Press.

Rader, Scott (2007), “A Phenomenological Inquiry into the Essence of the Technologically Extended Self,” in Academy of Marketing Science World Congress. Verona, Italy: Academy of Marketing Science.

Rajaobelina, Lova and Jasmin Bergeron (2009), “Antecedents and Consequences of Buyer-Seller Relationship Quality in the Financial Services Industry,” International Journal of Bank Marketing, 27 (5), 359-380.

Volume 14, Number 1

33

Rich, Gregory A. (1998), “The Constructs of Sales Coaching: Supervisory Feedback, Role Modeling and Trust,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 18 (1), 53-63.

Richardson, Linda (2009), Sales Coaching: Making the Great Leap from Sales Manager to Sales Coach (2nd ed.). Irwin, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Ricks, Joe M., Jacqueline A. Williams, and William A. Weeks (2008), “Sales Trainer Roles, Competencies, Skills and Behaviors: A Case Study,” Industrial Marketing Management, 37 (5), 593-603.

Rosen, Keith (2008), Coaching Salespeople into Sales Champions. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Sarin, Shikhar, Trina Sego, Ajay K. Kohli, and Goutam Challagalla (2010), “Characteristics That Enhance Training in Implementing Technological Change in Sales Strategy: A Field-Based Exploratory Study,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 30 (2), 143-156.

Somers, Matt (2012), Successful Coaching. London: Hodder Education.

Stanton, William J., Richard H. Buskirk, and Rosann L. Spiro (1991), Management of the Sales Force. Irwin, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Steel, Duncan (2013), “The Effectiveness of Integrated Sales Training and Sales Coaching within Private Banking,” Master’s Thesis, The University of Portsmouth.

Tapp, Alan (2004), “A Call to Arms for Applied Marketing Academics,” Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 22 (5), 579-590.

Thompson, Craig J., William B. Locander, and Howard R. Pollio (1989), “Putting Consumer Experience Back into Consumer Research: The Philosophy and Method of Existential-Phenomenology,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (2), 133.

Thuring, Fredrik, Jens P. Nielsen, Montserrat Guillén, and Catalina Bolancé (2012), “Selecting Prospects for Cross-Selling Financial Products Using Multivariate Credibility,” Expert Systems with Applications, 39 (10), 8809-8816.

Valencius, Matthew G. (2009), “Better, Cheaper, Faster: Ibm Identifies Designs, Deploys and Measures Sales Training to Fit an Accelerated World,” Training and Development, 63 (June), 60-63.

Wells, William D. (1993), “Discovery-Oriented Consumer Research,” Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (4), 489-504.

Methodology

Documents

Transcript of Methodology