the hidden minefields in the adoption of sales minefields in the adoption of sales

7/29/2019 The Hidden Minefields in the Adoption of Sales Minefields in the Adoption of Sales

1/20

The Hidden Minefields in the Adoptionof Sales Force Automation Technologies 1


2/20

The Hidden Minefields in the

Adoption of Sales Force

Automation Technologies



3/20

Author(s): Cheri Speier and ViswanathVenkatesh

Source: Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66,

(Jul., 2002), pp. 98-111

Published by: American Marketing



4/20

Abstract Sales force automation technologies are increasingly used to support

customer relationship management strategies; however, commentary

in the practitioner press suggests high failure rates.

The authors use identity theory as a lens to better understand

salesperson perceptions associated with technology rejection.

They collected survey data from 454 sales people across two firms

that had implemented sales force automation tools.

The results indicate that immediately after training, salespeople had

positive perceptions of the technology. However, six months afterimplementation, the technology had been widely rejected, and

salesperson absenteeism and voluntary turnover had significantly

increased.

There were also significant decreases in perceptions of organizational

commitment, job satisfaction, person-organization fit , and person-job

fit across both firms.

Finally, salespeople with stronger professional commitment indicated

more negative job-related perceptions as experience with the

technology increased.



5/20

Terminologies

Sales Force Automation sales force automation is a technique of

using software to automate the businesstasks of sales, including order processing,

contact management, information sharing,inventory monitoring and control, ordertracking, customer management, salesforecast analysis and employee performance

evaluation. SFA is often used interchangeably with CRM;

however, CRM does not necessarily implyautomation of sales tasks.

http://www.ecrmguide.com/http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/S/software.htmlhttp://www.webopedia.com/TERM/C/CRM.htmlhttp://www.webopedia.com/TERM/C/CRM.htmlhttp://www.webopedia.com/TERM/S/software.htmlhttp://www.ecrmguide.com/


6/20

Variables

IndividualCharacteristics Age : influence both individual perception about

technology (i.e. older workers shown morenegative perception about technology)

Sex: Women shows more negative perceptionabout adoption of technology

Disposition towards Technology

Self-efficacy : assess the degree to which a

person believes that he or she has the ability touse a technology to accomplish a particular tasks

Playfulness: Persons tendency to actimaginatively and spontaneously with computer.



7/20

Cont . Role Perception

Role Clarity : Uncertainty regarding the type of job behavior toperform in a specific situation

Role Conflict : Experiencing incompatible expectations thatneed to satisfied simultaneously

Organizational Characteristics Voluntariness

User Involvement

User Participation Management Support

Individual perceptions of Technology Relative Advantage : extent to which a system perceived as

better that its precursor

Visibility : The extent to which the system is seen in theorganization

Compatibility: Compatibility of System with organizationalnorms.

Complexity : free from physical and mental efforts

Results demonstrability : amendable to demonstrateThe Hidden Minefields in the Adoptionof Sales Force Automation Technologies 7


8/20

Person Technology Fit

Job Fit: The degree to which SFA tools

enhance the job

Professional Fit: the degree to which theSFA tools enhance professional

development or long-term career

Opportunities.

Professional State

Professional commitment

Cont .



9/20

Hypothesis

H1 : Individual characteristic will influenceindividual perception of the SFA Technology

H2 :Role perception will positively influenceindividual perception of the SFA Technology

H3 : Role perception will negatively influencesubjective outcomes

H4: Role perceptions will negatively influenceobjective outcomes

H5: Organizational characteristics will positively

influence individual perceptions of the SFAtechnology

H6 : Individual perception of the SFA Technologywill positively influence perception of the job andprofessional fit



10/20

Hypothesis Cont

H7 :Person Technology fit (job fit andprofessional fit) will positively influence subjectiveoutcomes

H8: Person Technology will positively influenceobjective outcomes.

H9 : Professional commitment will negativelyinfluence person technology fit.

H10 : Professional commitment will negativelyinfluence subjective outcomes

H11 : With increasing experience with SFAtechnology, subjective and objective outcomeswill become more negative compared withoutcomes earlier in the implementation process



11/20

Hypothesis



12/20

Research Method

Organizations & Participant Firm 1: Telecom :399 Salespeople (277 provided all

data at all points of measurements)

Firm 2: Real Estate :251 Salespeople (177provided all data at all points of measurements)

Data Collection Data collected over 6 months( perceptual data

collected after 2 months) &( objective data collected in 6months)

3 trainings are giving T1, T2 & T3

Paper-pencil survey after 6 weeks

Measures Collected through surveys (table 1)



13/20

Results

Measurement Model EQS 3.0 was used to perform confirmatory factor

analysis (CFA) and test the Structure model

t-values

Comparative fit Index

Structure Model

EQS used to test the research model



14/20

ConstructM

easure

sand

Reliabilities

basedonCFA



15/20

Research Model Testing



16/20

Comparison of Subjective and Objective outcomes over

time



17/20

Limitations

SFA Technologies studied are similarto and representatives of many other

SFA implementation, thus increasing

the potential generalizability of thecurrent work

With reference to internal validity,

there were no changes in sales forcecompensation, structures, quotas, so

forth over the duration of study



18/20

Implementation

This model provides the morecomplete understandings SFA

implementation in a particular and

employee acceptance in general



19/20

Conclusion

This research demonstrates empirically thattechnology, and specifically SFA tools, cangenerate excessive within-salespersonconflict that results in significantorganizational costs-a loss of not only

financial investment but also valuedemployees.

By understanding and proactively assessingthe potential for this conflict and then

implementing mechanisms to manage thisconflict appropriately, firms will stand a muchbetter chance of obtaining successful SFAimplementation



20/20


the hidden minefields in the adoption of sales minefields in the adoption of sales

Documents