Leadership substitutes as moderators of sales supervisory behavior

J BUSN RES 19!Xl:21:363-382

363

Leadership Substitutes as Moderators of Sales Supervisory Behavior Terry L. Childers University

of Minnesota

Alan J. Dubinsky St. Cloud State University

Steven J. Skinner University

of Kentucky

Previous research has found that a sales manager’s supervisory behavior can influence salespeople’s job attitudes and behaviors. A unique feature of many sales jobs that may reduce the impact sales managers have on sales personnel is that salespeople usually work alone. Researchers in organizational behavior have identified a variety of substitutes for leadership (which are comprised of individual, task, and organizational characteristics) that may serve to moderate the influence of a leader and thus offer guidance and support to subordinates beyond that which their manager can provide. Hierarchical multiple regression revealed that selected characteristics interact with a sales manager’s leader behavior in influencing salespeople’s job satisfaction. Introduction Researchers in organizational behavior assert that a manager’s leadership, or leader behavior, has a powerful effect on employee attitudes and behavior (Bass, 1981; Fleishman, 1973; Stogdill 1963). Moreover, researchers have proposed that sales supervisory behavior may influence salespeople’s affective and behavioral responses to their jobs (Walker et al., 1979). Indeed, empirical work in sales management has found that sales supervisory behavior affects a variety of job-related responses of sales personnel, including job satisfaction (Behrman and Perreault, 1984; Churchill et al., 1976; Fry et al., 1986; Kohli, 1985; Teas, 1980, 1983; Teas and Horrell, 1981), role perceptions (Behrman and Perreault, 1984; Fry et al., 1986; Kohli, 1985; Teas, 1983; Teas et al., 1979; Teas and Horrell, 1981; Walker et al., 1975), motivation (Kohli, 1985; Tyagi, 1982,1985), and performance (Tyagi, 1985). Although supervisory behavior appears to affect salespeople’s work outcomes,

Address correspondence to: Alan J. Dubinsky, Department University, 720 4th Avenue South, St. Cloud, MN 56301. Journal of Business Research 21,363-382 (1990) 6 I!990 Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc. 655 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10010

of Marketing, College of Business, St. Cloud State 0148-2963I9OIS3.50

364

J BUSN RES 1990:21:363-382

T. L. Childers et al.

there is a unique feature of many sales jobs that may serve to reduce the influence a sales manager has on sales personnel. The unique feature is that salespeople usually work alone (Belasco, 1966); that is, they generally are physically separated from their sales manager and other company personnel. Because salespersons often work alone, their sales manager (due to the physical separation from subordinates) may provide inadequate guidance, positive support and encouragement, or supervision. Consequently, salespersons’ job-related responses may be lower (or less favorable) than if their sales manager were more accessible. Given the physical separation between salespeople and their supervisors, sales managers should be particularly concerned about how to provide support, encouragement, and direction to salespersons in the absence of an immediate supervisor. Researchers in organizational behavior propound that there is a variety of “substitutes for leadership” (Kerr, 1977; Kerr and Jermier, 1978; Kerr and Slocum, 1981) which are comprised of individual (subordinate), task, and organizational characteristics. These characteristics may affect a leader’s (supervisor’s) influence on employee job responses (Kerr, 1977; Kerr and Jermier, 1978; Kerr and Slocum, 1981). As such, leadership substitutes may intervene between a sales manager’s supervisory behavior and salespeople’s job responses and offer sales personnel needed guidance and support as they work alone. Despite its potential value for sales administrators, no published research has explored whether the leadership substitutes construct has merit in a sales force setting. Consequently, a study was designed to explore the applicability of this construct in a sales force context. Kerr and Jermier (1978) have developed a scale to measure the leadership substitutes construct; also, several facets of the sales force (for example, quotas) might be pertinent substitutes but are not contained in the original scale. The purpose of the present study was to adapt the Kerr and Jermier (1978) scale to a selling context and examine whether leadership substitutes moderate the relationship between sales supervisory behavior and salesperson job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was selected as the job-related response of interest because it has received much research attention in the leadership behavior (Kerr et al., 1974) and sales management literatures (Comer and Dubinsky, 1985) and is considered to be important to leadership research (Tosi, 1982); because researchers in sales management have generally ignored means of enhancing job satisfaction in the absence of some form of sales supervision; and because it seemingly has important effects on salesperson turnover and motivation (Walker et al., 1979), and on withdrawal cognitions (Donnelly and Ivancevich, 1975; Futrell and Parasuraman, 1984; Parasuraman and Futrell, 1983).

Background

Literature

Leadership Leadership has been defined as “an attempt at interpersonal influence, directed through the communication process, toward the attainment of some goal or goals” (Fleishman, 1973; p. 3). To examine the impact of leadership on employee attitudes and behaviors, some means is needed by which effective managers can be distinguished from ineffective ones. Yukl (1981) proposes that a useful way of investigating leadership is by exploring leadership behavior, or what leaders do, and the results of that behavior.

J BUSN RES 1990:21:363-382

Leadership Substitutes

365

Two basic leadership behavior dimensions that have received substantial empirical attention in organizational behavior (Kerr et al., 1974) and sales management (Comer and Dubinsky, 1985) and were the focus of Kerr and Jermier’s (1978) initial work are initiating structure and consideration. Initiating structure concerns the degree to which a leader directs subordinates; clarifies their roles; and plans, coordinates, problem solves, criticizes, and pressures them to perform better. Thus, initiating structure is manifested by task-oriented behavior (Yukl, 1981). Consideration concerns the degree to which a leader is supportive, friendconsults with them; represents their ly, and considerate of subordinates; interests; has open communications with them; and recognizes their contributions. Consideration, therefore, is evidenced by relationship-oriented behavior (Yukl, 1981). A major concern of this investigation is to determine whether leadership substitutes moderate, or modify, the form and/or strength of the relationship between salesperson job satisfaction and each of the leadership behavior dimensions.

Hypotheses Most current theories and models of leadership posit that some kind of hierarchical leadership is required to influence employee affective and behavioral responses and that supervisors offer subordinates necessary direction and motivation that cannot be obtained in other ways. Recently, however, the assumption that hierarchical leadership is always important has been challenged (Kerr, 1977; Kerr and Jermier,

1978; Kerr and Slocum,

1981):

Often. . . leaders’ attempts to provide control may be dysfunctional. Role making, goal setting, and the other control activities. _. are time-consuming. To the extent that such activities are made the primary responsibility of a formal leader, other leadership roles. . . may necessarily go unattended. In other cases, leaders’ skills may be inadequate for them to serve as primary agents of control. Even when leaders’ skills are adequate, the reinforcing consequences of effective leadership control activities may be long delayed. . . [Also] leaders who exert high control often, whether or not intentionally, create climates that impede subordinates’ growth and develop-

ment (Kerr and Slocum, 1981; pp. 123-124). Kerr (1977) and Kerr and Jermier (1978) have identified a set of individual (subordinate), task, and organizational characteristics that may serve as leadership substitutes and thus moderate the relationship between job satisfaction and initiating structure (task-oriented leader behavior) and consideration (relationshiporiented leader behavior). In addition, although not discussed by Kerr (1977) or Kerr and Jermier (1978), there are unique characteristics in many sales jobs that could also be potential substitutes. The individual, task, organizational, and sales job characteristics that were viewed as potential substitutes in this study are briefly discussed below, along with their hypothesized relationships with salesperson job satisfaction. Hypotheses are developed separately for initiating structure and consideration because, based on prior research (which is cited below), not all potential substitutes under investigation are posited as influencing both the initiating structure/job satisfaction and consideration/job satisfaction relationships. Individual Characteristics as Substitutes. Kerr and Jermier (1978) have identified

366

J BUSN RES 1990:21:363-382

T. L. Childers et al.

four characteristics of individuals (subordinates) as potential leadership substitutes. Adequate ability, experience, training, and knowledge of subordinates should reduce their need to rely on supervisors to obtain task-related information that will guide them in the performance of their job. A high need for independence can reduce employees’ receptivity toward superiors’ attempts to offer task-related information and guidance (Kerr and Slocum, 1981) and support; providing job autonomy may enhance employee job satisfaction (Hackman and Oldham, 1975). Prior research has shown that need for independence moderates the relationship between taskoriented leader behavior and organizational commitment, although no such moderating effect was found for job satisfaction (Howell and Dorfman, 1986). Professional orientation entails subordinates’ developing horizontal relationships within the organization, placing emphasis on how peers evaluate their performance, and using peers outside of their firm, as well as professional organizations, as important referents (Filley et al., 1976); these referents can also be sources of support and encouragement. Zndifference toward organizational rewards could produce an “influence vacuum” (Kerr and Jermier, 1978) where a manager’s efforts at using directive or supportive behaviors are ineffectual because subordinates may view company rewards as unattractive. Howell and Dorfman (1986) determined that this substitute moderates the relationship between job satisfaction and taskand relationship-oriented leader behaviors. Based upon the previously mentioned theoretical and empirical work, the following hypotheses are offered: Hypothesis

1:

(a) Ability, experience, training, and knowledge; (b) need for independence; (c) professional orientation; and (d) indifference toward organizational rewards will moderate the relationship between sales supervisor initiating structure (task-oriented behavior) and salesperson job satisfaction.

Hypothesis

2:

(a) Need for independence, (b) professional orientation, and (c) indifference toward organizational rewards will moderate the relationship between sales supervisor consideration (relationship-oriented behavior) and salesperson job satisfaction.

Task Characteristics as Substitutes. Three task characteristics are suggested as potential leadership substitutes by Kerr and Jermier (1978). Unambiguous, routine, and methodologically invariant tasks tend to be predictable, follow standardized policies and procedures, and entail centralized decision making (Kerr and Slocum, 1981), thus possibly reducing the need for managers to provide role clarification and other task-related information. This variable has been shown to moderate the association between task-oriented leader behavior and organizational commitment, but not job satisfaction (Howell and Dorfman, 1981). In addition, Kerr and Jermier (1978) ascertained that this substitute moderates the relationship between taskand relationship-oriented leader behaviors and role ambiguity. Task-provided feedback indicates how well an employee is performing, is derived from the job itself (rather than from a supervisor, for example), is an immediate and accurate source of feedback, and can be particularly motivating (Kerr and Jermier, 1978); so, it may reduce the significance of feedback provided by the manager. Task-provided feedback has been found to moderate the relationship

J BUSN RES 1990:21:363-382

Leadership Substitutes

367

between task- and relationship-oriented leader behaviors and organizational commitment (Kerr and Jermier, 1978) and between relationship-oriented leader behavior and job satisfaction (Howell and Dorfman, 1981). Intrinsically satisfying tasks afford employees opportunity to feel satisfied with their achievements, and the satisfaction is derived from the job itself (Gibson et al., 1988). Thus, intrinsically satisfying tasks may reduce a manager’s influence in stimulating employees to develop positive feelings and a sense of accomplishment. This substitute has been shown to moderate the relationship between relationship-oriented leader behavior and organizational commitment (Howell and Dorfman, 1981; Kerr and Jermier, 1978), between task-oriented leader behavior and organizational commitment (Kerr and Jermier, 1978), and between relationship-oriented leader behavior and job satisfaction (Howell and Dorfman, 1981). The above discussion about task-based leadership substitutes suggests that the following hypotheses may be posited: Hypothesis 3:

(a) Unambiguous, routine, and methodologically invariant tasks and (b) task-provided feedback will moderate the relationship between sales supervisor initiating structure and salesperson job satisfaction.

Hypothesis

(a) Intrinsically satisfying tasks will moderate the relationship between sales supervisor consideration and salesperson job satisfaction.

4:

as Substitutes. Kerr and Jermier (1978) have idenof organizations as potential leadership substitutes. Organizational formalization involves the use of explicit plans, goals, areas of responsibility, guidelines, and ground rules; organizational infZexibiZity entails employment of rigid and unbending rules and procedures. These two organizational characteristics could reduce subordinates’ need for job-related information and guidance that supervisors provide. Organizational formalization moderates the association between task- and relationship-oriented leader behaviors and organizational commitment (Howell and Dorfman, 1981) and job satisfaction (Howell and Dorfman, 1981, 1986). Highly specified and active advisory and staff functions and closely knit cohesive work groups provide information, guidance, and performance feedback that a leader may offer; also, closely knit, cohesive work groups can furnish emotional support, encouragement, and friendship, and thus reduce the need to obtain these from the manager. Closely knit, cohesive work groups have been shown to moderate the relationship between task- and relationship-oriented leader behaviors and organizational commitment (Howell and Dorfman, 1981). Organizational rewards not within the leader’s control is a potential substitute, particularly when the rewards are under the control of some other person; if no such control exists, this characteristic may engender an “influence vacuum” (Kerr and Jermier, 1978). Spatial distance between a superior and subordinates may serve to moderate the interaction between a leader and a subordinate and thus create an “influence vacuum” (Kerr and Jermier, 1978). The preceding discussion indicates that the following hypotheses may be proffered: Organizational

Characteristics

tified six characteristics

368

J BUSN RES 1990:21:363-382

T. L. Childers et al.

Hypothesis 5:

(a) 0 r ganizational formalization; (b) organizational inflexibility; (c) highly specified and active advisory and staff functions; (d) closely knit, cohesive work groups; (e) organizational rewards not within the leader’s control; and (f) spatial distance between a superior and subordinates will moderate the relationship between sales supervisor initiating structure and salesperson job satisfaction.

Hypothesis

(a) Closely knit, cohesive work groups; (b) organizational rewards not within the leader’s control; and (c) spatial distance between a superior and subordinates will moderate the relationship between sales supervisor consideration and salesperson job satisfaction.

6:

Sales Job Characteristics as Substitutes. Certain characteristics of a sales job could be potential leadership substitutes. Five selected substitutes were identified after reviewing the sales management literature (e.g., Anderson and Hair, 1983; Churchill et al., 1985; Stanton and Buskirk, 1987). Compensation plans, quotas, and expense accounts were included in the study as potential substitutes because they represent “automatic supervisory techniques” (Stanton and Buskirk, 1987; p. 388) that: . . have inherent supervisory powers and work automatically toward company goals. These techniques can be exceptionally effective. Unlike the field [sales] supervisor. . these automatic techniques travel with the reps everywhere, every minute of the day, and on every call they make.

These three techniques may guide salespeople in their jobs with respect to what they should be doing and how they should be executing job tasks, thus reducing the influence of the sales manager. Customers and competitors are two additional potential substitutes. Customers can communicate directly to salespeople concerning the adequacy of their job performance (e.g., personally praise or criticize the salesperson, make or not make a purchase) or do so indirectly (e.g., complain to the salesperson’s manager). Customers thus can be a source of task-relevant information and guidance. In addition, customers may provide support, encouragement, and friendship, and so reduce salesperson reliance on the manager for these. Competitors’ actions in the marketplace (e.g., raising or lowering prices, introducing new products) or with a particular customer can indirectly guide sales personnel in the performance of their job. For example, competitors’ tactics may result in a salesperson’s changing the terms of sale or proposing an alternative product for a given customer, or analyzing why a particular sale was lost. Therefore, competitors may provide guidance originally supplied through the salesperson’s supervisor. Based upon the above discussion, the following hypotheses are presented:

Leadership Substitutes

J BUSN RES 19!90:21:363-382

Hypothesis 7:

(a) Compensation plans, (b) quotas, (c) expense accounts, (d) customers, and (e) competitors will moderate the relationship between sales supervisor initiating structure and salesperson job satisfaction.

Hypothesis 8:

(a) Customers will moderate the relationship between sales supervisor consideration and salesperson job satisfaction.

Method Sample Data were collected through a self-administered questionnaire. A census of insurance agents from the midwest region of a large, multi-line insurance company (n = 645) and from the entire sales force of a medium-sized multi-line insurance company (n = 375) was taken. Usable questionnaires were obtained from 273 and 216 agents, respectively, in the two companies, for a combined effective response rate of 58% (n = 588). Eighty-six percent (n = 505) of the respondents were male. Median age of the agents was 39.1 years. Approximately 51% had a college education. Median job tenure (length in present position) was 5.2 years; median time in a sales-related position, 10 years; median time with the current sales manager, 1.5 years. Analyses of company-provided data indicated that respondents were representative of agents in their respective companies. Additionally, assessment of responses to the leadership substitutes questions did not reveal any systematic differences between agents representing the two companies, thus enabling the sample to be combined for subsequent analyses. Procedures Questionnaires were mailed to agents. Accompanying each questionnaire were a letter from the vice president of marketing indicating company support for the project and encouraging participation; a letter from the researchers promising confidentiality; and a pre-addressed, stamped envelope returned directly to the researchers. One week prior to mailing the questionnaires, a letter from the vice president of marketing was sent to all agents’ immediate sales managers notifying them of the study, describing its purpose, and requesting that they advise their agents about the survey. One week after the questionnaires were mailed, a letter from the vice president of marketing was sent to sales managers asking them to remind their agents to complete the questionnaire. Measures Initiating structure and consideration were measured with the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) (Form XII), a frequently used instrument developed by Stogdill (1963). It solicits respondents’ perceptions about how their supervisor behaves toward them. Ten items constitute the initiating structure scale (a = .87); ten items, the consideration scale (a = .91). Responses to the questions ranged from “always” to “never” on a 5-point scale. Job satisfaction was measured

370

J BUSN

RES 1990:21:363-382

T. L. Childers et al.

using a reduced version of INDSALES (Churchill et al., 1974) that was generated by Childers et al. (1980). Reliability for the 61-item scale was .87. Individual-, task-, and organizational-related substitutes (55 items) were measured using scales developed by Kerr and Jermier (1978). Items were slightly modified to conform to a selling situation. Items (25) assessing compensation plans, quotas, expense accounts, customers, and competitors as potential leadership substitutes were developed specifically for the study. Respondents assessed the degree to which each of the 18 potential substitutes was present in their work situation on a 5-point scale, ranging from “almost always true or almost completely true” to “almost always untrue or almost completely untrue.” The questionnaire was reviewed by sales and marketing executives in the respondent companies to ensure that the items were germane to the agents’ job. The trait validity (Peter, 1981) of the instrument used to assess leadership substitutes was examined along several dimensions. The reliability of each of the 18 components was evaluated using coefficient alpha (Cronbach, 1951). Following purification of each scale (cf., Childers et al., 1980), alphas ranged from .46 to .85. Six of the components met Nunnally’s (1978) minimum criterion of .70 for alpha, while seven of the remaining components had alphas in excess of .60. Based on the purification procedures, the original 80 items from the instrument were reduced to 60 for subsequent analyses. To examine the dimensionality, or structure, of the scale, factor analyses were conducted on a randomly selected analysis sample and then compared to the solution for a validation sample using the 60 purified items. The consistency of the factor structure between the two samples was assessed through the congruency coefficient (Harman, 1960). Only two of the congruency coefficients were less than .70, thus indicating convergence between the two samples. Factor analyses resulted in reducing the 60 purified items to 58, eliminating two substitutes (indifference toward organizational rewards and intrinsically satisfying tasks)-and thus precluding tests of hypotheses Id, 2c, and 4a-from further analyses, and combining items from two substitutes (unambiguous, routine tasks, and task-provided feedback-“task characteristics”)-and thus combining tests of hypotheses 3a and 3b for use in subsequent analyses. Thus, through psychometric assessment the original go-item, 18-component scale was reduced to 58 items and 15 components that were utilized to examine the role of leadership substitutes as moderators of the relationship between sales supervisory behavior and salesperson job satisfaction. (An in-depth presentation of the results from the psychometric assessment of the leadership substitutes scale is available from the authors.) Results Data were analyzed using Hierarchical Multiple Regression-HMR-(Bagozzi, 1984; Bagozzi and Schnedlitz, 1985; Cohen and Cohen, 1975; Sharma et al., 1981). HMR was utilized to test each hypothesis separately. Following procedures adapted from Sharma et al. (1981) and Howell and Dorfman (1981), a series of steps was conducted for each potential substitute. These steps, in conjunction with criteria adopted from Sharma et al. (1981), were used to determine whether the leadership substitute moderates the sales supervisory behavior/salesperson job satisfaction relationship. If the leadership substitute moderates the relationship, it is labeled

Leadership Substitutes

J BUSN RES 1990:21:363-382

371

either a “pure” or “quasi-” moderator (Sharma et al., 1981). A substitute that is a “pure” moderator is one that would serve to supplant the sales manager’s influence on salesperson job satisfaction. A substitute that is a “quasi-” moderator is one that would serve to supplement the sales supervisor’s impact on salesperson job satisfaction. If it does not moderate the relationship, the leadership substitute may still have an influence on job satisfaction and be either an “antecedent/predictor” or “homologizer” (Sharma et al., 1981). (Provided in the Appendix is a more detailed description of the data analytic procedures.)

Moderator Analyses for Initiating Structure Sales supervisor initiating structure is positively related to salesperson job satisfaction (b = S53, p < .Ol, R’ = .30). This significant finding permits subsequent analyses focusing on whether the 15 leadership substitutes individually moderate the initiating structure/job satisfaction relationship. Hierarchical regression analysis results reveal that three potential substitutesprofessional orientation (Proorien), task characteristics (Taskchar), and customer relationships (Cust)-act as quasi-moderators and thus moderate the initiating structure/job satisfaction association (see Table 1). Thus, hypotheses lc, 3a, 3b, and 7d receive empirical support. Findings from additional analyses, not shown because of space limitations, indicate that this relationship is stronger for salespeople above the median score on these three variables than for those below it. The remaining 12 potential substitutes do not moderate the initiating structure/ job satisfaction relationship, so their respective hypotheses are not supported. One of these variablewompetitors (Compet)-serves, however, as an antecedent/ predictor of job satisfaction. The 11 remaining substitutes were analyzed to determine whether they are homologizers. Regressions were run for the median splits on these variables, and subgroup R’s were tested using r to z transformation. Only one substitute, rewards not within the leader’s control (Rewcont), demonstrates a significant difference between the two R’s, thus qualifying as an homologizer (see upper half of Table 2). The initiating structure/job satisfaction relationship is stronger for salespeople above the median score for this substitute than for those below it.

Moderator Analyses for Consideration Findings reveal that sales supervisor consideration is positively related to job satisfaction (b = .625, p < .Ol, R* = .39). This result allows an examination of whether the six hypothesized leadership substitutes moderate the consideration/ job satisfaction relationship. Two potential substitutes-cohesive work groups (Workgrp) and customer relationships (Cust)-act as quasi-moderators, thus moderating the consideration/ job satisfaction association; these findings provide support for hypotheses 6a and 8a (see Table 3). Results from additional analyses, not shown, revealed that the consideration/job satisfaction relationship is stronger for salespeople above the median score on these two variables than for those below it. The four remaining substitutes do not moderate the consideration/job satisfaction relationship (thus

,304 .303 ,326 ,345 .324 ,308 ,305 .308 ,305

Structure x Ability (.248) Structure x lndepen (- .146) Structure X Poorien (.306)b Structure x Taskchar (.815)” Structure x Formahz (.151) Structure x Inflexib (- ,126) Structure x Advfunc (- ,217) Structure x Workgrp (-,200) Structure x Rewcont (.017)

Ability (-,200)

Indepen (.104)

Proorien ( - .426)

Taskchar (- ,336)

Formaliz (.060)

Inflexib (.024)

Advfunc (.221)

Workgrp (.114)

Rewcont (JJ46)

Structure (668)

Structure (.387)

Structure (-.031)

Structure (.411)

Structure (.625)

Structure (669)

Structure (648)

Structure (551)

Adjusted R2

Job Satisfaction

Structure (.345)

Results:

Interaction Term (beta)

Regression

Potential Moderator (beta)

Multiple

Leader Behavior (beta)

Table 1. Moderated

Structure,

5e

5d

5c

5b

5a

3a, 3b

lc

lb

la

Hypothesis

With Initiating

Moderator,

Not supported

Not supported

Not supported

Not supported

Not supported

Supported

Supported

Not supported

Not supported

Hypothesis Test Result

Potential

Homologizer

None

None

None

None

Quasi-moderator

Quasi-moderator

None

None

Nature of Relationship

and Interaction

J BUSN RES 199W?1:363-382

373

374

J BUSN RES 1990:21:363-382

T. L. Childers et al.

Table 2. Homologizer Tests: Comparison of R2 for High and Low Moderator Groups With Respect to Job Satisfaction Leader Behavior

Potential Moderator

R’: High Moderator Group

R’: Low Moderator Group

Z-Value

Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure Structure

Ability Indepen Formaliz Inflexib Advfunc Workgrp Rewcont Spatdis Compens Quotas Expense

.33 .27 .27 .27 .26 .31 .37 .26 .31 .24 .30

.25 .34 .26 .33 .35 .30 .22 .21 .30 .32 .31

1.190 1.037 0.168 1.008 1.375 0.349 2.400” 0.156 0.180 1.168 0.000

Consider Consider Consider Consider

Indepen Poorien Rewcont Spatdis

.38 .39 .39 .33

.40 .37 .38 .38

0.193 0.386 0.386 0.731

not lending support to hypotheses 2a, 2b, 6b, or 6c) and do not influence job satisfaction as either antecedents/predictors or as homologizers (see lower half of Table 2).

Discussion The purpose of the present study was to determine whether leadership substitutes moderate the relationship between salesperson job satisfaction and two kinds of sales supervisory behavior-initiating structure (task-oriented behavior) and consideration (relationship-oriented behavior). Fifteen individual, task, organizational, and sales job-related characteristics were examined for their potentially moderating influence on the job satisfaction/initiating structure relationship. Six individual, organizational, and sales job-related characteristics were investigated for their potentially moderating effects on the job satisfaction/consideration association. Findings indicate that selected leadership substitutes do indeed play a role in the salesperson job satisfaction/sales supervisory behavior relationship. Prior studies (see review by Comer and Dubinsky, 198.5) have tended to examine the individual influence of sales supervisory behavior on salesperson job satisfaction (see Kohli, 1989, for an exception). That is, past empirical work has generally found a sales manager’s behavior, in isolation from other factors, can have a favorable effect on sales force job satisfaction. The present investigation extends previous research with its findings that salesperson job satisfaction can be enhanced through the combined effects of sales supervisory behavior and selected individual, task, organizational; and sales job characteristics. In other words, salespeople’s job satisfaction can be increased with appropriate supervisory behavior, but it can be augmented even more when such behavior operates in concert with certain leadership substitutes. Thus, this research contributes to the current body of knowl-

,400 .3% .390

Consider x Proorien (.088) Consider x Workgrp (-.365) Consider x Rewcont (- ,330) Consider x Spatdis ( - .276) Consider x Customer (.456)

Proorien (- .195)

Workgrp (.312)

Rewcont (.223)

Spatdis (.138)

Customer (- .370)

Consider (557)”

Consider (844)

Consider (.914)

Consider (831)

Consider (.419)

8a

6c

6b

6a

2b

2a

Hypothesis

Supported

Not supported

Not supported

Supported

Not supported

Not supported

Hypothesis Test Result

Potential Moderator,

Quasi-moderator

None

None

Quasi-moderator

None

None

Nature of Relationship

and Interaction

Note: Findings from the psychometric assessmentof the leadership substitutes scale resulted in omitting “indifference toward organizational rewards” and “intrinsically satisfying tasks” from subsequent analyses and thus not testing hypotheses 2c and 4a, respectively. ‘p < .Ol.

,400

.397

,389

Consider x Indepen (.198)

Indepen (.149)

Consider (.792)

Adjusted R2

Interaction Term (beta)

Potential Moderator (beta)

Leader Behavior (beta)

Table 3. Moderated Multiple Regression Results: Job Satisfaction With Consideration,

376

J BUSN RES 1990:21:%3-382

T. L. Childers et al.

edge in sales force management through the discovery that certain factors can supplement a sales supervisor’s leadership behavior to improve sales force job satisfaction. Initiating StructurelJob Satisfaction Moderators Three substitutes moderate the salesperson job satisfaction/sales manager initiating structure relationship: professional orientation, task characteristics, and customer relationships. More specifically, if salespeople’s supervisors are task-oriented (thereby providing ample direction for salespeople), salespeople’s job satisfaction tends to be enhanced to the extent that they develop relationships with their sales peers, are concerned about how sales peers evaluate their performance, and use their sales peers (both within and outside of the organization) as important referents. This finding suggests that sales organizations should facilitate salespeople’s joining professional organizations (especially those in the areas of sales and marketing) and thus interacting with noncompany sales personnel. Reimbursing salespeople for membership fees, incorporating memberships in professional organizations as part of the performance evaluation criteria, or encouraging salespeople to take time off to participate in professional organizations are possible ways of inducing salespersons to join such organizations. The above result also implies that salespeople seemingly gain important information vis-a-vis their performance from sales peers. As important referents, sales peers can serve as role models, offer advice and support, and indicate (either explicitly or implicitly) appropriate and inappropriate levels of performance. So, sales managers should encourage salespeople to seek out their sales peers for direction and guidance. This might be done, for example, by developing a “sales companion” program where each salesperson is matched with another salesperson (or group of salespeople) who becomes that salesperson’s designated referent; this approach would be especially valuable for junior sales personnel who could be matched with senior salespeople. In addition, when a sales position’s tasks and responsibilities are clearly defined and it provides performance feedback via nonsupervisory means, sales supervisors exhibiting task-oriented behavior seemingly have a more favorable influence on salesperson job satisfaction than when a position does not possess these characteristics. This finding apparently suggests that the duties of a sales job need to be specified and clearly articulated to salespeople. This might be accomplished through the use of training manuals, job descriptions, group or one-on-one discussions with sales managers, or role playing exercises. The goal of such approaches is to impart to sales personnel what is expected of them. Furthermore, task-oriented sales supervisors tend to have a more positive effect on salesperson job satisfaction when customers guide salespeople in the performance of their job. This result shows the important impact customers can have on salespeople (beyond merely their buy/no buy decision) and the significance of the information they can offer salespeople during the sales process. Thus, sales managers could encourage salespeople to be especially attentive to customers’ cues that may indicate where to direct the selling process (i.e., adaptive selling [Weitz, 19811). In addition, sales personnel could directly solicit customer input concerning the adequacy of their job performance. Moreover, salespersons should be encouraged

J BUSN RES 19!90:21:363-382

Leadership Substitutes

377

to be accepting of both blandishments and criticism from customers and use them to advantage in their job. Two other potential substitutes were found to have an effect on salesperson job satisfaction, but they do not moderate the job satisfaction/initiating structure relationship. Competitors’ actions in the marketplace are a predictor of salesperson job satisfaction. Specifically, competitor behavior is positively related to job satisfaction. As was argued earlier, competitors can indirectly provide salespeople with feedback and/or guidance about their job performance which can be used to adjust salespersons’ behavior in the selling arena. The above finding implies that salespeople need to pay close attention to competitive behavior in the marketplace. Closely monitoring competitors’ actions can seemingly be instructive concerning what proactive or reactive tactics salespeople need to take to deal with competition. Organizational rewards not within the leader’s control was determined to be an homologizer, which influences the strength of the relationship between job satisfaction and initiating structure but does not interact with, nor is related to, initiating structure. Specifically, sales personnel have greater job satisfaction when their taskoriented sales managers are less influential in determining recipients of organizational rewards (e.g., pay raises, bonuses, promotions) than when they are more influential. At least two related reasons may explain this finding. First, task-oriented sales managers tend to be directive; that is, they provide structure for salespersons by guiding them in their job. If sales managers have major involvement in both directing salespeople in their job and determining recipients of organizational rewards, perhaps salespeople feel stifled or constrained-or even unnecessarily dominated-in their work by their sales manager; this could conceivably reduce their job satisfaction. A second possible explanation for the above result is related to the nature of a task-oriented supervisory style. Task-oriented sales managers, by definition, generally supervise their sales personnel closely (Teas, 1983). This closeness might lead sales managers to develop subjective impressions (positive and/or negative) of their salespeople. Such impressions may affect their recommendations concerning reward distributions. Sales personnel, however, might prefer a reward system that is predicated on input from sources other than (or at least in addition to) their immediate sales manager (e.g., a higher-level manager) who make reward recommendations without being biased by familiarity with the salespeople. Sales personnel may view this kind of reward system to be more fair and objective, thus augmenting their job satisfaction. The above result seemingly implies that to affect salesperson job satisfaction favorably, decisions concerning organizational rewards should be made by sources other than merely salespersons’ immediate sales managers. ConsiderationlJob

Satisfaction Moderators

Two potential substitutes were found to be moderators of the salesperson job satisfaction/sales manager consideration relationship. The two are closely knit, cohesive work groups and customer relationships. More specifically, when salespeople’s managers exhibit consideration (are supportive, friendly, considerate, and communicative), salespersons’ job satisfaction is increased to the extent that they work in a job environment characterized by favorable relationships among coworkers. These positive relationships seemingly provide emotional support, en-

378

J BUSN RES 1990:21:363-382

T. L. Childers et al.

couragement, and friendship that serve to heighten salespeople’s job satisfaction. This result suggests that sales managers need to create an environment that fosters good working relationships among sales and nonsales employees. To assist in accomplishing this kind of work situation, sales managers could lead by example (i.e., serve as role models) by interacting with sales and nonsales personnel in a constructive, positive, and supportive manner. Moreover, sales supervisors should impart to salespeople the important role nonsales personnel have in the organization and how they facilitate salespeople’s selling efforts. Moreover, sales managers exhibiting consideration may enhance salespeople’s job satisfaction when salespeople’s relationships with their customers are positive. Evidently, customers offer emotional support, encouragement, and friendship that can induce higher levels of salesperson job satisfaction. This finding implies that sales managers need to convey to salespeople the importance of the customer and how the customer has a significant impact on both the individual salesperson and the organization. In particular, salespeople might be instructed to be especially attentive to the needs of customers and to service them at an appropriate level in order to build and maintain favorable buyer-seller relationships. Summary The findings suggest that salespeople’s job satisfaction can be increased when they receive direction, guidance, support, and encouragement from both sales supervisors and nonsupervisory sources. The sales job itself, sales peers (both within and outside of the organization), nonsales colleagues, and customers apparently work in tandem with sales managers to help augment salesperson job satisfaction. Given that salespeople often work alone in the field, perhaps supervisory and nonsupervisory sources offer salespeople a respite from the organizational and affiliative estrangement they may feel while working in the field on their own. Having a panoply of alternatives from which to acquire adequate direction and affiliative need satisfaction apparently assists in increasing salespeople’s job satisfaction. Limitations and Future Research The results of this investigation should be viewed in light of at least two important limitations. First, data were collected from salespeople in only two companies and one industry; thus, generalizability of the findings may be reduced. Second, the organizational environment of the two firms employed in the study may not have been totally amenable to the leadership substitutes construct; this may have resulted in the apparent lack of a moderating effect of certain substitutes. As Kerr and Jermier (1978; p. 400) note, however, this is probably not unusual: In most organizations it is likely that. . substitutes exist for some leader activities but not for others. Effective leadership might therefore be described as the ability to supply subordinates with needed guidance and good feelings which are not being supplied by other sources. Given that this was the first study to examine the applicability of leadership substitutes in a sales force context, additional empirical work is needed to clarify our understanding of the nature of the construct and the mechanisms through which

Leadership Substitutes

J BUSN RES 1990:21:363-382

379

it operates. Several avenues appear fruitful for future investigations. First, samples of salespeople in industries other than that used here (insurance) could be utilized; this is particularly important given that the results obtained in prior investigations in sales management often vary across industries (see Comer and Dubinsky, 1985; Weitz, 1981). Second, the present work examined the impact leadership substitutes have on two leader behavior-initiating structure and consideration; subsequent investigations might include leader behaviors other than those employed here (see, for example, Kerr and Jermier, 1978; Kohli, 1985; and Tyagi, 1982 for alternative leader behaviors). Third, 15 leadership substitutes were investigated in the final statistical analyses. Attempts might be made to identify additional leadership substitutes in a selling context; as more leader behaviors are used in subsequent research, additional substitutes may be identified. Fourth, the current study considered only one outcome variable-job satisfaction; future studies may consider additional outcomes, such as performance, job involvement, and motivation. Further research investigating the nature of leadership substitutes in a sales force context should facilitate their application and enrich our understanding of the impact of sales supervisory behavior on sales personnel. Appendix The underlying proposition of this paper is that leadership-substitutes may serve to modify either the form and/or strength of the relationship between sales supervisory behavior (initiating structure and consideration) and salesperson job satisfaction, and thus can be characterized as moderators (Sharma et al., 1981). The nature of a sales manager’s influence on job satisfaction may depend on the score of a moderator variable, conceptualized in the present study as a leadership substitute. An appropriate method for identifying significant interactions between a predictor variable (such as leader initiating structure or consideration) and leadership substitutes is through Hierarchical Multiple Regression-HMR (e.g., Bagozzi, 1984, 1985; Cohen and Cohen, 1975; Sharma et al., 1981). Using HMR, in the present study a series of regressions was conducted for the potential substitutes with the two leader behaviors, initiating structure and consideration. A series of steps was conducted for each substitute based on procedures adopted from Sharma et al. (1981) and Howell and Dorfman (1981). First, each leader behavior was tested separately for significance with the dependent variable, job satisfaction. Given that these relationships were significant, each relevant substitute was then sequentially entered into separate regression equations along with the appropriate cross-product (leadership substitute x leader behavior) interaction term, and incremental contributions were assessed for their statistical significance. Criteria adopted from Sharma et al. (1981) were employed to determine whether a particular leadership substitute moderated the leader behavior (initiating structure or consideration)/job satisfaction relationship. Based on their work, if the leadership substitute is related to the criterion (job satisfaction), but does not interact with the leader behavior, it is classified as an “antecedent/predictor.” If the interaction term is significant, then the substitute serves to modify the form of the relationship between leader behavior and job satisfaction and is one of two kinds of moderators. If only the interaction term is significant, then the leadership substitute qualifies as a “pure moderator.” If the interaction term is significant and

380

J BUSN RES 19!40:21:363-382

T. L.

Childers et al.

the leadership substitute is also related to job satisfaction, then the variable is a “quasi-moderator.” An alternative kind of variable is an “homologizer,” which influences the strength of a predictor-criterion relationship through the error term in the regression equation. If the substitute does not yield a significant interaction term, nor is a significant predictor, a subgroup analysis is conducted to determine whether an homologizer exists. This analysis involves splitting the sample at the median for the leadership substitute score and then conducting separate regression analyses for observations falling above and below this median split. The R’s for the two groups are then tested to determine if the strength of the relationship between the leader behavior and job satisfaction differs between the two groups; if the R’s are significantly different, the variable qualifies as an homolgizer. (See Sharma et al., 1981, for further discussion about procedures for classifying moderator variables.) References

Anderson, R. E., and Hair, J. F., Sales Management, Random House, New York. 1983. Bagozzi, R. P., and Schnedlitz, P., Social Contingencies in the Attitude Model: Certain Interaction Hypotheses. Social Psychol. Q. 48 (4) (1985): 366-373. Bagozzi,

R. P., Expectancy

Value

Models:

An Analysis

of Critical

A Test of

Measurement

Issues.

ht. J. Res. Marketing 1 (1984): 295-310. Bass, B. M., Stogdill’s Handbook

of Leadership,

The Free Press,

New York.

1981.

Behrman, D. N., and Perreault, W. D., A Role Stress Model of the Performance Satisfaction of Industrial Salespersons. J. Marketing 48 (Fall 1984): 9-21. Belasco,

J. A., The Salesman’s

J. Marketing 30 (April

Role Revisited.

and

1966): 6-9.

Childers, T. L., Churchill, G. A., Ford, N. M., and Walker, 0. C., Towards a More Parsimonious Measure of Job Satisfaction in the Industrial Salesforce, in 1980 AMA Educators’ Conference Proceedings. R. P. Bagozzi et al., eds., American Marketing Association, Chicago, Ill. 1980, pp. 344-349. Churchill, G. A., Ford, N. M., and Walker, Irwin, Homewood, Ill. 1985.

0. C., Sales Force Management,

Richard

D.

Churchill, G. A., Ford, N. M., and Walker, 0. C., Organizational Climate and Job Satisfaction in the Sales Force. J. Marketing Res. 13 (November 1976): 323-332. Churchill, G. A., Ford, N. M., and Walker, 0. C., Measuring the Job Satisfaction dustrial Salesmen. J. Marketing Res. 11 (August 1974): 254-260.

of In-

Cohen, J., and Cohen, P., Applied Multiple RegressionlCorrelation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J. 1975. Comer, J. M., and Dubinsky, Lexington, Mass. 1985.

A. J., Managing the Successful Sales Force, Lexington

Cronbach, L. J., Coefficient Alpha (October 1951): 297-334. Donnelly, J. H., and Ivancevich, (January 1975): 71-74.

and the Internal J. M., Role Clarity

Structure

of Tests.

and the Salesman.

Books,

Psychometrika

16

J. Marketing 39

Filley, A. C., House, R. J., and Kerr, S., Managerial Process and Organizational Behavior, Scott, Foresman and Company, Glenview, Ill. 1976. Fleishman, E. A., Twenty Years of Consideration in the Study of Leadership. E. A. Fleishman University, Carbondale, Ill. 1973. Fry, L. W., Futrell,

C. M., Parasuraman,

A.,

and Structure, in Current Developments and J. G. Hunt, eds., Southern Illinois and Chmielewski,

M. A., An Analysis

of

Leadership Substitutes

.I BUSN RES 1!45’0:21:363-382

381

Alternative Causal Models of Salesperson Role Perceptions and Work-Related Attitudes. J. Marketing Res. 23 (May 1986): 153-163. Futrell, C. M., and Parasuraman, A., The Relationship of Job Satisfaction and Performance to Salesforce Turnover. J. Marketing 48 (Fall 1984): 33-40. Gibson, J. L., Ivancevich, J. M., and Donnelly, J. H. Orgunizutions: Behavior, Structure, Processes, Business Publications, Inc., Plano, Texas. 1988. Hackman, J. R., and Oldham, G. K., The Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. J. Appl. Psychol. 60 (April 1975): 159-170. Harman, H. H., Modern Factor Analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill. 1960. Howell, J. P., and Dorfman, P. W., Leadership and Substitutes for Leadership Among Professional and Nonprofessional Workers. J. Appl. Behuv. Sci. 22 (January 1986): 29-46. Howell, J. P., and Dorfman, P. W., Substitutes for Leadership: Test of a Construct. Academy of Management J. 24 (December 1981): 714-728. Kerr, S., Substitutes for Leadership: Some Implications for Organizational Design. Orgunizution and Administrative Sci. 8 (Spring 1977): 135-146. Kerr, S., and Slocum, J. W., Controlling Performances of People in Organizations, in Handbook of Organizational Design. P. C. Nystrom and W. H. Starbuck, eds., Oxford University Press, New York. 1981, pp. 116-134. Kerr, S., and Jermier, J. M., Substitutes for Leadership: Their Meaning and Measurement. Organizational Behav. Human Performance 22 (December 1978): 375-403. Kerr, S., Schriesheim, C. A., Murphy, C. J., and Stogdill, R. M., Towards a Contingency Theory of Leadership Based Upon the Consideration and Initiating Structure Literature. Organizational Behav. Human Performance 12 (August 1974): 62-82. Kohli, A. K., Effects of Supervisory Behavior: The Role of Individual Differences Among Salespeople. J. Marketing 53 (October 1989): 40-51. Kohli, A. K., Some Unexplored Supervisory Behaviors and Their Influence on Salespeople’s Role Clarity, Specific Self-Esteem, Job Satisfaction, and Motivation. J. Marketing Res. 22 (November 1985): 424-433. Nunnally, J. C., Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York. 1978. Parasuraman, A., and Futrell, C. M., Demographics, Job Satisfaction, and Propensity to Leave of Industrial Salesmen. J. Bus. Res. 11 (March 1983): 33-48. Peter, J. P., Construct Validity: A Review of Basic Issues and Marketing Practices. J. Marketing Res. 18 (May 1981): 133-145. Sharma, S. R., Durand, R. M., and Gur-Arie, O., Identification and Analysis of Moderator Variables. J. Marketing Res. 18 (August 1981): 291-300. Stanton, W. J., and Buskirk, R. M. Management of the Sales Force, Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, 111.1987. Stogdill, R. M., Manual for Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire: Form XII, Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Research, Columbus, Ohio. 1963. Teas, R. K., Supervisory Behavior, Role Stress, and the Job Satisfaction of Industrial Salespeople. J. Marketing Res. 20 (February 1983): 84-91. Teas, R. K., An Empirical Test of Linkages Proposed in the Walker, Churchill, and Ford Model of Salesperson Motivation and Performance. J. Academy Marketing Sci. 8 (Winter/Spring 1980): 58-72. Teas, R. K., and Horrell, J. F., Salespeople’s Satisfaction and Performance Feedback. Industrial Marketing Management 16 (February 1981): 355-369. Teas, R. K., Wacker, J., and Hughes, R. E., Path Analysis of Causes and Consequences of Salespeople’s Perceptions of Role Clarity. J. Marketing Res. 16 (August 1979): 355369. Tosi, H. L. Administration, Leadership, Organization Structure and Other Factors that

J BUSN RES 1!490:21:363-382

Influence

T. L. Childers et al. Behavior: Why the Concept of Leadership

ganizational

Behavior

and Management:

is Not Powerful Enough, in OrApproach. John Wiley New

A Contingency

York. 1982, pp. 403-411. Tyagi, P. K., Relative Importance of Key Job Dimensions and Leadership Behaviors in Motivating Salesperson Work Performance. /. Marketing 49 (Summer 1985): 76-86. Tyagi, P. K., Perceived Organizational Climate and the Process of Salesperson Motivation. J. Marketing Res. 14 (May 1982): 240-254. Walker, 0. C., Churchill, G. A., and Ford, N. M., Where Do We Go from Here? Selected Conceptual and Empirical Issues Concerning the Motivation and Performance of the Industrial Sales Force, in Critical Issues in Safes Management: State-of-the-Art and Future Research Needs. G. Albaum and G. A. Churchill, eds., University of Oregon Press, Eugene, Ore. 1979, pp. 10-75. Walker, 0. C., Churchill, G. A., and Ford, N. M., Organizational Determinants of the Industrial Salesman’s Role Conflict and Ambiguity. J. Marketing 30 (January 1975): 32-39. -5 ,. Weitz, Bl A., Effectiveness of Sales Interactions: A Contingency Framework. J. Marketing 45 (Winter 1981): 85-103. Yukl, G. A.; ‘Leadership in Organizations, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 1981.