Rapid Evidence Assessment of the scientific literature on the drivers of sales performance

2

Drivers of sales performance: a rapid assessment of the scientific evidence

1. Rationale for this review

The executive board of the Ista Group is considering changing the pay structure for the company’s sales staff. Before making a final decision, the board wants to know what is known in the scientific literature about the drivers of sales performance. For this reason, the board has approached the Center for Evidence-Based Management (CEBMa) to undertake a Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) of the available evidence. This REA will present an overview of this evidence. 2. Main question: What does the review answer?

What is known in the scientific literature about the drivers of sales performance? Supplementary questions Other issues raised, which will form the basis of our conclusion to the main question above, are:

1. Which sales performance determinants are most widely studied? 2. What is known of their effect? 3. What is known in the scientific literature about the effect of financial incentives on sales

performance? 4. What is known in the scientific literature about the effect of goal setting on sales performance?

The evidence to answer question 3 (financial incentives) and 4 (goal setting) will be derived from REAs previously conducted by CEBMa. 3. Search strategy: How was the research evidence sought?

The following three databases were used to identify studies: ABI/INFORM Global, Business Source Premier, and PsycINFO. The following generic search filters were applied to all databases during the search:

1. Scholarly journals, peer-reviewed 2. Published in the period 1980 to 2016 for meta-analyses and the period 1990 to 2016 for primary

studies 3. Articles in English

A search was conducted using combinations of different search terms, such as ‘sales performance’, ‘sales agent’, ‘sales representative’ and ‘performance’. We conducted 15 different search queries and screened the titles and abstracts of more than 100 studies. An overview of all search terms and queries is provided in Annex I.

3

4. Selection process: How were the studies selected?

Selection took place in two phases. Firstly, the titles and abstracts of the 100+ studies identified were screened for their relevance to this review. In case of doubt or lack of information, the study was included. Duplicate publications were removed. This first phase yielded 13 meta-analyses and 25 controlled and/or longitudinal studies.

Secondly, studies were selected based on the full text of the article according to the following criteria.

Inclusion criteria 1. Type of studies: quantitative, empirical studies. 2. Measurement: a) studies in which variables affecting (objective) sales performance were measured

or b) studies in which the effect of moderators and/or mediators on (objective) sales performance was measured.

3. Context: studies related to workplace settings.

Exclusion criteria 1. Cross-sectional studies (single studies only). 2. Studies with serious methodological weaknesses. 3. Studies in which only subjective sales performance measures were used.

This second phase yielded 10 meta-analyses and 16 controlled and/or longitudinal studies. An overview of the selection process is provided in Annex II. 5. Critical appraisal: What is the quality of the studies included?

To determine the methodological appropriateness of the research design of the studies included, the classification system of Shadish, Cook and Campbell (2002), and Petticrew and Roberts (2006) was used. The following levels of appropriateness were used for the classification:

Design Level

Systematic review or meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies AA

Systematic review or meta-analysis of non-randomized controlled before-after studies A

Randomized controlled study

Systematic review or meta-analysis of non-randomized controlled or before-after studies

B Non-randomized controlled before-after study

Interrupted time series

Systematic review or meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies C

Controlled study without a pretest or uncontrolled study with a pretest

4

To determine methodological quality, all the studies included were systematically assessed on explicit quality criteria. Based on a tally of the number of weaknesses, the trustworthiness was downgraded and the final level was determined as follows: a downgrade of one level if two weaknesses were identified; a downgrade of two levels if four weaknesses were identified, etc.

Finally, the effect sizes were identified. An effect (e.g. a correlation, Cohen’s d or omega) can be statistically significant but may not necessarily be of practical relevance: even a trivial effect can be statistically significant if the sample size is big enough. For this reason, the effect size – a standard measure of the magnitude of the effect – of the studies included was assessed. To determine the magnitude of an effect, Cohen’s rules of thumb (Cohen, 1988) were applied. According to Cohen a ‘small’ effect is an effect that is only visible through careful examination. A ‘medium’ effect, however, is one that is ‘visible to the naked eye of the careful observer’. Finally, a ‘large’ effect is one that anybody can easily see because it is substantial. Outcome of the critical appraisal

The overall quality of the studies included was moderate to high. All 10 meta-analyses were based on cross-sectional studies, so they were graded as Level C. Of the 16 primary studies, 5 qualified as a randomized controlled study and were therefore graded Level A or B. The remaining studies concerned quasi-experimental or longitudinal designs and were graded Level B or C. An overview of all the studies included and information regarding year of publication, research design, sample size, population, main findings, effect sizes and limitations is provided in Annex III (secondary studies) and Annex IV (primary studies).

5

6. Main findings Question 1: Which sales performance determinants are most widely studied?

Based on an analysis of the 10 meta-analyses we can conclude that the following determinants are most widely studied:

Determinants Variables & constructs Nr. of studies

Skills and knowledge

Skill level: Learned proficiency at performing necessary tasks, skills related to understanding, persuading and getting along with customers. Knowledge: The depth and width of the knowledge base to size up sales situations, classify prospects, and select appropriate sales strategies for clients. Product knowledge, not only regarding their own products but also competitors’ products.

300+

Personal characteristics

Personality traits: Basic dimensions on which people differ General Mental Ability: IQ Verbal ability: Exhibited skill to understand and communicate adequately with words (subsection of general mental ability)

300+

Motivation

Motivation: The amount of effort a salesperson desires to expend on tasks associated with the job Goal orientation: Underlying goals (e.g. learning vs performing) that salespeople pursue Organizational/work commitment: The salesperson’s psychological attachment to his/her work or the organization

300+

Role perceptions

Role ambiguity: Perceived lack of information to perform the job adequately and uncertainty about the expectations Role conflict: The perception that expectations and demands of two or more role partners are mismatched Role overload: Perception that the cumulative role demands exceed the abilities and motivation to perform a task

200+

Sales orientation

Selling Orientation vs Customer Orientation (SOCO): focusing on the selling and promotion of a particular product versus focusing on customer needs Adaptive selling: Adjusting your sales strategies in ways that better fit customers’ needs and preferences

150+

6

Question 2: What is known of their effect? 1. Sales skills and knowledge have a moderate to large effect on sales performance (Level C). Several meta-analyses found medium to large correlations between selling ability (skills and knowledge) and sales performance (Churchill, 1983; Verbeke, 2011; Vinchur, 1998). In addition, a recent longitudinal study found that sales persons with ‘deep knowledge’ (i.e. detailed knowledge not only regarding their own products but also competitors’ products) are better prepared to serve their customers – which has a positive impact on sales performance (Jang, 2017). 2. Personal characteristics have a moderate to small effect on sales performance (Level C). Across several meta-analyses, general mental ability was found to be a moderate predictor for sales performance. In addition, personality traits (in particular extraversion and conscientiousness) were found to have only a small association with sales performance (Churchill, 1983; Verbeke, 2011; Vinchur, 1998). 3. Motivation has a small to moderate effect on sales performance (Level C). A meta-analysis conducted in 1985 found sales person’s motivation to be a predictor for sales performance, but the effect sizes found were rather small (Churchill, 1985). A recent meta-analysis found larger effect sizes, but in this study motivation was defined as ‘cognitive choice’ (the deliberate choice to spending time on a specific task), ‘work engagement’ (enthusiasm, organizational citizenship behaviour) and ‘goal orientation’ (Verbeke, 2011). Similar (small to moderate) effect sizes were found for the effect of organizational commitment on sales performance (Jaramillo, 2005). 4. Role perceptions have a moderate to large effect on sales performance (Level B/C). Several meta-analyses have indicated that a sales person’s role perception such as perceived role ambiguity/clarity, role conflict and role overload have a moderate to large impact on a sales person’s sales performance (Brown, 1993; Churchill, 1985; Verbeke, 2011). 5a. Customer orientation has a small effect on short-term sales performance (Level B/C). Sales-persons with high levels of customer orientation truly care about customers and engage in actions that customers value, such as listening to feedback and solving problems. It was therefore assumed that sales persons with a customer orientation will have a higher sales performance than sales persons with a sales orientation. However, several meta-analyses have demonstrated that a customer orientation only has a small effect on sales performance (Franke, 2006; Jaramillo, 2007; Goad, 2014). 5b. Customer orientation has a moderate effect on long-term sales performance (Level C). A longitudinal study has indicated, however, that a high level of customer orientation does have a moderate impact on a sales person’s long-term performance (Jaramillo, 2009). 6. Adaptive selling behaviour fully mediates the impact of customer orientation on sales performance (Level C) A longitudinal study and recent meta-analysis indicates that the impact of customer orientation on sales performance is mediated through adaptive selling in the short term, while having a direct influence on longer-term performance. (Jaramillo, 2009; Goad, 2014).

7

7. Adaptive selling behaviour has a moderate to large effect on sales performance (Level C). Salespeople with high levels of adaptive selling behaviour adjust their sales strategies in ways that better fit customers’ needs and preferences. Several meta-analyses have shown that adaptive selling behaviour is a key driver of sales performance (Verberke, 2011; Vinchur, 1998). It should be noted, however, that the degree of a salesperson’s autonomy moderates this relationship (Goad, 2014). 8. A learning goal orientation is a strong predictor of sales person’s adaptive selling behaviour and sales performance (Level B). Sales persons with a learning orientation enjoy the process of learning and like to apply what they have learned into practice. Conversely, sales persons with a performance-goal orientation view their abilities as fixed and are focused on proving themselves to others (demonstrating their abilities). A recent meta-analysis suggests that a learning orientation is strongly associated with customer orientation and leads to substantially higher engagement in adaptive selling behaviours (Goad, 2014); In contrast, a performance goal orientation was found to be unrelated to sales performance (Vanderwalle, 1999). In addition, a recent controlled study demonstrated that sales persons who believe that selling is an unchangeable (‘born’) ability rather than a learnable, changeable (‘made’) ability are less open to feedback and tend to avoid (both learning and performance) goals (Novel, 2016). 9. Training interventions have a moderate to large effect on sales performance (Level A) Several meta-analyses and randomized controlled studies indicate that training interventions focusing on selling techniques (i.e., human relations, self-awareness, problem solving and decision-making, emotional self-awareness, self-management skills) enhance sales performance (Farrel, 2001; Frayne, 2000; Gignac, 2012). In addition, a recent longitudinal study found that the more types of training courses a salesperson attends, the better his/her sales performance (Cheng, 2014). 10. Personnel selection based on a combination of determinants strongly enhances sales performance (Level C). Although most determinants mentioned above have only small to moderate effects on sales performance, several studies indicate that personnel selection based on a combination of determinants strongly enhances sales performance. A meta-analysis indicated improvements in sales performance from 15 to 30% (Farrel, 2001). Additional relevant findings from single studies • Providing new sales persons with a realistic job preview helps to improve role clarity,

reduces role stress, enhances performance and decreases attrition (Barksdale, 2003; small effect, Level C).

• Job embeddedness (helping newcomers transition from being outsiders to becoming active,

participating insiders) is positively associated with sales performance (Cheng, 2014; small effect, Level C).

• How a salesperson perceives a new product influences the amount of effort he/she puts into selling it (Ahearne, 2010; small effect, Level C). Selling a ‘substantially’ better product is perceived to be an easy task, whereas selling a ‘marginally’ better product is perceived to be a relatively difficult task. When a sales person’s compensation depends on their overall sales, they therefore may be reluctant to put effort into the selling of ‘marginally’ better products.

8

• There is a positive relationship between cumulative periods of sales performance failure and a newly hired sales person’s selling-oriented behaviour (Boichuck, 2014; moderate/large effect, Level C). When newly hired sales persons fail to meet their sales targets for a longer period, they are more likely to focus on immediate sales and disregard customer needs. In addition, it was found that a transformational leadership style and error management may curb this behaviour. (Error management is a training method that deemphasizes short-term performance, promotes exploratory behaviour, and frames errors as natural by-products of exploration that are instrumental to learning.)

Question 3: What is known in the scientific literature about the effect of financial incentives on sales performance? The following main findings are derived from an REA conducted in 2015 based on four meta-analyses, representing results from more than 200 single studies. The overall quality of the meta-analyses was moderate to high: two of them included studies that used a control group or before-after measurement. All four meta-analyses were published between 2010 and 2014 (Ten Have, 2016). 1. Overall, financial incentives have a moderate positive effect on performance (Level A). There is an abundance of evidence that financial incentives tend to have a moderate positive effect on a wide range of performance outcomes, including sales. Financial incentives increase a person’s intention to perform well because of the monetary benefit (also referred to as the price effect). However, this effect differs among forms of incentives, motivation and performance outcomes (Cerasoli, 2014; Garbers, 2014; Wegge, 2010; Weibel, 2010). 2. Indirectly performance-salient incentives positively affect the relationship between intrinsic motivation and performance – this relationship is weaker by directly performance-salient incentives (Level B). Directly performance-salient incentives are characterized by a clear link between incentive and performance, such as sales commission. Indirectly performance-salient incentives lack this clear link (e.g. base salary or education). Several studies indicate that indirect incentives have a stronger positive effect on the relationship between intrinsic motivation and performance than direct incentives (Cerasoli, 2014). 3. Intrinsic motivation is a better predictor for quality of performance, whereas financial incentives are a better predictor for quantity of performance (Level B). Financial incentives are found to be a better predictor for performance quantity outcomes, for instance when commissions are linked to the amount of output. Employees’ intrinsic motivation, however, were found to be a better predictor of outcome in terms of quality of performance, for example when the accuracy of output is measured (Cerasoli, 2014). 4. Financial incentives tend to increase performance of non-interesting tasks but decrease performance of interesting tasks (Level A). Financial incentives are found to have a strong positive effect on performance in cases of non-interesting tasks, but they tend to have a small or even negative effect in the cases of interesting tasks (Garbers, 2014). This effect could be explained by the fact that the application of financial incentives erodes intrinsic motivation (also referred to as the crowding-out effect), but the evidence for this theory is inconclusive (Cerasoli, 2014; Shaw, 2015).

9

5. The effect on performance for equitably distributed rewards within teams is higher than for equally distributed rewards (Level A). Equitably distributed rewards (those that differentiate among team members) tend to have a higher impact on performance than when rewards are distributed equally (i.e. uniformly among team members). This effect decreases when the number of team members increases (Garbers, 2014). 6. When financial incentives or compensations are reduced, sales representatives may increase their performance (Level B). A well-conducted controlled longitudinal study found that a decrease in financial compensation did not cause a corresponding decrease in performance but instead seemed to spur sales agents into increasing their performance in an effort to maintain the same level of pay. This effect was larger for sales agents who were not highly compensated (Dustin, 2013). Question 4: What is known in the scientific literature about the effect of goal setting on sales performance? The following main findings are derived from an REA conducted in 2016 based on 34 meta-analyses and 19 controlled and/or longitudinal studies. The overall quality of the studies included was high: of the 34 meta-analyses, 13 included randomized and/or non-randomized controlled studies and were therefore qualified as level A or AA. Of the remaining 21 meta-analyses, one was graded as Level B and 14 were graded as Level C. Of the 19 primary studies, 15 qualified as randomized controlled studies and were therefore graded Level A (Gifford, 2016). 1. Difficult and challenging goals have a moderately positive effect on performance (Level A). Numerous meta-analyses have demonstrated that difficult, challenging goals have a moderately positive effect on performance, compared with easy goals. Goals must therefore be made as difficult but realistic as the individuals can cope with. In addition, goals must be challenging and stimulate individual motivation (Tubbs, 1986; Mento, 1987; O’Leary-Kelly, 1994; Locke & Latham, 2002, 2006; Brown, 2005; Brown & Warren, 2009; Brown, Lent, Telander & Tramayne, 2011; Rahyuda, Syed & Soltani, 2014). 2. Clear, specific goals have a moderately positive effect on performance (Level A). Several meta-analyses have indicated that clear, specific goals have a moderately positive effect on performance, compared with non-specific goals or do-your-best instructions. The goal must therefore be very focused and clear, and achievable within a certain time frame (Tubbs, 1986; Mento, 1987; Locke & Latham, 2002, 2006; Brown & Warren, 2009; Brown, 2005; Abraham & Graham-Rowe, 2009; O'Leary-Kelly et al, 1994; McEwan et al., 2016; Rahyuda, Syed & Soltani, 2014; Jäger et al., 2015; Sivasubramaniam, Liebowitz & Lackman; 2012). 3. However, when employees must first acquire requisite knowledge or skills to perform the task, specific and challenging goals can have a negative effect on performance (Level A). Several randomized controlled studies have demonstrated that when a task requires the acquisition of knowledge before it can be performed effectively, a general goal (e.g. ‘do your best’) leads to higher performance than a specific high goal. In fact, when knowledge acquisition is necessary for effectively performing a task, setting a specific high goal for a level of performance can lead people to focus on the potential negative consequences of failure rather than on task-relevant ways to attain the goal (Kanfer & Ackerman, 1989; Mone & Shalley, 1995; Winters and Latham, 1996; Brown & Latham, 2002).

10

4. In addition, when employees need to acquire knowledge or skills in order to perform a set task, or when the task involved is complex, then behavioural goals and learning goals tend to have a more positive effect on performance than outcome goals (Level A). In addition to the findings reported above, several randomized controlled studies have demonstrated that when a simple task is involved, an outcome goal (focused on results) leads to higher performance than urging people to do their best, whereas when a complex task is involved, a learning goal (e.g. adopting a specific number of strategies or procedures to perform the task correctly) leads to higher performance than either an outcome goal or urging people to do their best. A possible explanation for this finding is that whereas the setting of a performance goal increases one’s motivation to implement one’s knowledge, the setting of a learning goal focuses attention on developing one’s task-related ability through knowledge acquisition. This finding suggests that, when attempting new or complex tasks, organizations should set specific, difficult learning goals as opposed to performance-outcome goals (Winters & Latham, 1996; Brown & Latham, 2002; Latham & Brown, 2006; Porter and Latham, 2013) 5. Goal-setting shows stronger positive effects on performance when combined with some form of performance feedback or progress monitoring (Level AA). Several meta-analyses demonstrate that a crucial part of goal-setting is the ongoing evaluation of one’s performance relative to a standard. As goal-setting interventions in which performance feedback is provided allow the participant to make such an evaluation, they have a moderately strong, positive effect on performance, compared with interventions without feedback (Klein, Wesson, Hollenbeck & Alge, 1999; McEwan et al., 2016; Patterson et al., 2011). Rather than emphasizing feedback provision, interventions can also encourage progress-monitoring. Indeed, an employee can search for feedback by him- or herself, for instance, by frequently and deliberately assessing progress towards goal attainment, or progress feedback can be inherent to the task (Harkin et al., 2015; Harkins & Lowe, 2000). In other words, the source of feedback, impersonal or personal, internal or external, does not seem to matter, as long as it allows the employee to monitor his/her progress. Furthermore, progress-monitoring has larger effects on goal attainment when the outcomes are reported or somehow made public, and when the information is physically recorded, which is often the case in organization and work contexts through meetings, forms and reports. 7. Synthesis

Drivers of sales performance is one of the most widely studied topic in the domain of management. The evidence-base is extensive and dates back more than 40 years. More than 30 years ago, Churchill et al. (1985) published a seminal paper on the antecedents of sales performance that has shaped academic and managerial thinking on sales management. This meta-analysis found five predictive categories to explain variance in sales performance (in order of predictive validity): role perceptions, skill levels, aptitude, motivation, and personal characteristics. A meta-analysis conducted 25 years later by Verbeke et al (2009) confirmed this finding, but concluded with a slightly different order: selling-related knowledge, degree of adaptiveness, role, cognitive aptitude and work engagement. A central implication of this REA is that in order to improve sales performance over time an organization should begin by selecting sales personnel based on a combination of the drivers mentioned above. Training, especially when combined with valid selection practices, can enhance sales performance even more.

In addition, the scientific literature strongly supports the use of financial incentives to improve sales performance. However, application requires a thoughtful approach, as outcomes can vary widely depending on the organizational circumstances. Intrinsically motivated salespeople executing interesting tasks where quality outcomes determine success can be encouraged by indirect incentives. Conversely, direct financial incentives are effective when extrinsic motivation and quantitative performance need to be stimulated.

11

Finally, the theory of goal-setting states that there is a positive, linear relationship between a challenging, specific goal and task performance. In addition, the evidence clearly demonstrates that the effect of goal-setting can be enhanced when it is combined with some form of performance feedback or progress monitoring (in particular when the outcomes are reported or somehow made public). However, the evidence also demonstrates that goal-setting should not be used as a one-size-fits-all, over-the-counter treatment to boost performance, as there are several moderators that affect the outcome. For example, when employees must first acquire knowledge or skills to perform a task, or when the task involved is complex, then specific and challenging goals can have a negative effect on performance. In those situations, behavioural goals and learning goals are more effective. 8. Limitations

To provide a ‘rapid’ review, concessions were made in the breadth and depth of the search process. As a consequence, some relevant studies may have been missed.

A second limitation concerns the critical appraisal of the studies included: this REA did not incorporate a comprehensive review of the psychometric properties of the tests, scales and questionnaires used.

A third limitation concerns the fact that some findings are based on a limited number (sometimes only one) of studies. Although most of these studies were well controlled, no single study can considered to be strong evidence – it is merely indicative.

Finally, this REA focused only on meta-analyses and high-quality studies, i.e. studies with a control group and/or a before- and after-measurement. For this reason, a large number cross-sectional studies are excluded. As a consequence, new, promising findings that are relevant for practice may have been missed.

Given these limitations, care must be taken not to present the findings presented in this REA as conclusive.

12

9. References

Abraham, C., & Graham-Rowe, E. (2009). Are worksite interventions effective in increasing physical activity? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Psychology Review, 3(1), 108-144.

Ahearne, M., Rapp, A., Hughes, D. E., & Jindal, R. J. (2010). Managing Sales Force Product Perceptions and Control Systems in the Success of New Product Introductions. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 47(4), 764.

Barksdale, H. C., Jr., Bellenger, D. N., Boles, J. s., & Brashear, T. G. (2003). The impact of realistic job previews and perceptions of training on sales force performance and continuance commitment: A longitudinal test. The Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 23(2), 125-138

Boichuk, J. P., Bolander, W., Hall, Z. R., Ahearne, M., Zahn, W. J., & Nieves, M. (2014). Learned Helplessness Among Newly Hired Salespeople and the Influence of Leadership. Journal of Marketing, 78(1), 95.

Boichuk, J. P. (2015). Developing and retaining new hires during the sales force socialization process. (76), ProQuest Information & Learning, US.

Brown, S. P., & Peterson, R. A. (1993). Antecedents and consequences of salesperson job satisfaction: Meta-analysis and assessment of causal effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(1), 63.

Brown, T. C. (2005). Effectiveness of distal and proximal goals as transfer of training intervention: A field experiment. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(3), 369- 387.

Brown, T. C. and Warren, A. M. (2009). Distal goal and proximal goal transfer of training interventions in an executive education program. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 20(3), 265-284.

Brown, T. C., & Latham, G. P. (2002). The effects of behavioural outcome goals, learning goals, and urging people to do their best on an individual's teamwork behaviour in a group problem-solving task. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 34(4), 276.

Cerasoli, C. P., Nicklin, J. M., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 140(4), 980.

Cheng, C.-Y. (2014). A longitudinal study of newcomer job embeddedness and sales outcomes for life insurance salespersons. Journal of Business Research, 67(7), 1430.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Churchill, G. A., Jr., Ford, N. M., Hartley, S. W., & Walker, O. C., Jr. (1985). The Determinants of Salesperson Performance: A Meta-Analysis. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 22(2), 103.

Dustin, S. L., & Belasen, A. R. (2013). The Impact of Negative Compensation Changes on Individual Sales Performance. The Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 33(4), 403.

Farrell, S., & Hakstian, A. R. (2001). Improving salesforce performance: A meta-analytic investigation of the effectiveness and utility of personnel selection procedures and training interventions. Psychology & Marketing, 18(3), 281-316.

13

Franke, G. R., & Park, J.-E. (2006). Salesperson Adaptive Selling Behavior and Customer Orientation: A Meta-Analysis. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 34.

Frayne, C. A., & Geringer, J. M. (2000). Self-management training for improving job performance: A field experiment involving salespeople. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 361-372.

Garbers, Y., & Konradt, U. (2014). The effect of financial incentives on performance: A quantitative review of individual and team-based financial incentives. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 87(1), 102-137.

Goad, E. A., & Jaramillo, F. (2014). The good, the bad and the effective: a meta-analytic examination of selling orientation and customer orientation on sales performance. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 34(4), 285-301. doi:10.1080/08853134.2014.899471

Gignac, G. E., Harmer, R. J., Jennings, S., & Palmer, B. R. (2012). EI training and sales performance during a corporate merger. Cross Cultural Management, 19(1), 104-116

Gifford, G. (2016). Could do Better? Assessing what works in performance management. CIPD

Harkin, B., Webb, T. L., Chang, B. P., Prestwich, A., Conner, M., Kellar, I., & Sheeran, P. (2015). Does monitoring goal progress promote goal attainment? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin, Vol 142(2), 198-229

Harkins, S. G., & Lowe, M. D. (2000). The Effects of Self-Set Goals on Task Performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(1), 1-40.

Jäger, A., Loschelder, D. D., & Friese, M. (2015). How self-regulation helps to master negotiation challenges: An overview, integration, and outlook. European Review of Social Psychology, 26(1), 203-246.

Jaramillo, F., Mulki, J. P., & Marshall, G. W. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational commitment and salesperson job performance: 25 years of research. Journal of Business Research, 58(6), 705-714.

Jaramillo, F., Ladik, D. M., Marshall, G. W., & Mulki, J. P. (2007). A meta-analysis of the relationship between sales orientation-customer orientation (SOCO) and salesperson job performance. The Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 22(5), 302-310

Klein, H. J., Wesson, M. J., Hollenbeck, J. R., & Alge, B. J. (1999). Goal commitment and the goal-setting process: conceptual clarification and empirical synthesis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(6), 885.

Locke, E. A. and Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705–717.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Current directions in psychological science, 15(5), 265-268.

McEwan, D., Harden, S. M., Zumbo, B. D., Sylvester, B. D., Kaulius, M., Ruissen, G. R.,& Beauchamp, M. R. (2016). The effectiveness of multi-component goal setting interventions for changing physical activity behaviour: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Health psychology review, 10(1), 67-88.

14

Mento, A. J., Steel, R. P., & Karren, R. J. (1987). A meta-analytic study of the effects of goal setting on task performance: 1966–1984. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 39(1), 52-83.

Mone, M. A., & Shalley, C. E. (1995). Effects of task complexity and goal specificity on change in strategy and performance over time. Human Performance, 8(4), 243-262.

Kanfer, R,. and Ackerman, P. (1989) Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 74(4), Aug 1989, 657-690.

Novell, C. A., Machleit, K. A., & Sojka, J. Z. (2016). Are good salespeople born or made? A new perspective on an age-old question: implicit theories of selling ability. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 36(4), 309-320. doi:10.1080/08853134.2016.1214594

O'Leary-Kelly, A., Martocchio, J. and Frink, D. A Review of the Influence of Group Goals on Group Performance. The Academy of Management Journal 1994. Vol. 37 (5) pp. 1285-1301

Patterson, M., Rick, J., Wood, S. J., Carroll, C., Balain, S., & Booth, A. (2010). Systematic review of the links between human resource management practices and performance.

Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). How to appraise the studies: an introduction to assessing study quality. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide, 125-163.

Porter, R. L., & Latham, G. P. (2013). The effect of employee learning goals and goal commitment on departmental performance. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 20(1), 62-68.

Rahyuda, A., Syed, J., & Soltani, E. (2014). The role of relapse prevention and goal setting in training transfer enhancement. Human Resource Development Review, 13(4), 413-436

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton, Mifflin and Company.

Sivasubramaniam, N., Liebowitz, S. J., & Lackman, C. L. (2012). Determinants of New Product Development Team Performance: A Meta-analytic Review. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(5), 803-820.

Ten Have, S., Ten Have, W., Huijsmans, A. B., & Otto, M. (2016). Reconsidering change management: Applying evidence-based insights in change management practice (Vol. 16). Routledge.

Tubbs, M. E. (1986). Goal setting: A meta-analytic examination of the empirical evidence. Journal of applied psychology, 71(3), 474.

VandeWalle, D., Brown, S. P., Cron, W. L., & Slocum, J. J. W. (1999). The Influence of Goal Orientation and Self-Regulation Tactics on Sales Performance: A Longtitudinal Field Test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(2), 249-259.

Verbeke, W., Dietz, B., & Verwaal, E. (2011). Drivers of sales performance: A contemporary meta-analysis. Have salespeople become knowledge brokers? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(3), 407-428. doi:10.1007/s11747-010-0211-8

Vinchur, A. J., Schippmann, J. S., Switzer, F. S., III, & Roth, P. L. (1998). A meta-analytic review of predictors of job performance for salespeople. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4), 586-597.

15

Wegge, J., Jeppesen, H. J., Weber, W. G., Pearce, C. L., Silva, S. A., Pundt, A., ... & Piecha, A. (2011). Promoting work motivation in organizations. Journal of Personnel Psychology.

Weibel, A., Rost, K., & Osterloh, M. (2009). Pay for performance in the public sector—Benefits and (hidden) costs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(2), 387-412.

Winters, D., & Latham, G.P. (1996). The effect of learning versus outcome goals on a simple versus a complex task. Group and Organization Management, 21, 236– 250.

All annexes are available on request