Volume 58 Number 3 Falll 1982 Performance-Reward Instrumentalities and the Motivation of Retail Salespeople R. KENNETH TEAS Associate Professor of Marketing lowa State University ‘Ames, Lowa Using a framework based upon the expectancy theory of motivation, hypotheses are tested concerning the prediction of retail sales- persons’ job-related instrumentality estimates—the degree to which improved performance is perceived to result in increased rewards. The findings indicate that the magnitude of the retail salesperson's instrumentality estimates is positively related to personality, leader- ship style, communication, and task characteristics variables. The human resource cost of a typical retail store represents approxi- mately 70 percent of the store's total expense dollars (Mason and Mor- ris 1978). Although there has been a trend toward increased utilization of self-service techniques in retailing, this cost cannot be expected to decrease substantially in the foreseeable future because retail employees supposedly will continue to play an important role in customers’ deci- sion-making processes. For example, the results of a study by Jolson and Spath (1973) indicated that customers’ perceptions of service by sales clerks were one of the most influential factors determining store patronage. Burstiner (1975-1976) found that the customer's perception of sales personnel was one of the most significant dimensions of de- partment store image. In a survey of 485 consumers in a major metro- politan area, Hansen and Deutscher (1977-1978) examined the relative importance of 41 attributes in consumers’ evaluation of grocery stores and department stores. The attribute “helpful personnel” was rated sixth and eighth for department and grocery stores respectively. Clax- ton and Ritchie (1979) examined the issue of consumer prepurchase shopping problems among a group of 224 residents of five cities. ‘Among the most important problems was “ignorant sales staff.” Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedMotivation of Retail Salespeople Although considerable progress has been made in the development of theories and empirical knowledge concerning the management of non- marketing employees and industrial salespeople, the management of the retail salesperson has continued to be neglected as a theoretical or empirical research topic. (See Churchill, Ford, and Walker 1981 for a discussion of needed research in retail salesforce management.) The re- sults of a recent national survey of retailing experts indicated that 45 percent of the respondents expected that union demands would contrib- ute significantly to the bankruptcy of many retailing organizations, sug- gesting that this neglect of the retail employee may have disastrous con- sequences for many retailers (Bellenger, Stanley, and Allen 1977). ‘The purpose of the present study was to test a set of propositions con- cerning the retail sales employee's perceptions of job instrumentalities. The specific propositions represent extensions of recent theoretical and empirical research in industrial salesforce motivation (Oliver 1974: Teas 1981a; Walker, Churchill, and Ford 1977) into the area of retail salesforce motivation THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK The theoretical framework used in the development of the proposi- tions was based upon the expectancy theory of motivation developed by Vroom and others (Lewin 1938; Vroom 1964). Although several modifications of the original model have been offered, expectancy theories generally posit that the employee’s job performance (P) is a positive multiplicative function of the employee's level of motivation (M) and level of ability (A), as follows: P=f(Mx A) () The motivational component of the model can be specified as: M,= f(E,x ¥;) Q) where: M, =motivation: The force compelling the individual to expend effort on task i, E,=expectancy: The employee's estimate of the likelihood that ex- pending effort on task / will result in improved performance on performance dimension j. A performance dimension is often re- ferred to as a first-level outcome. ¥, =valence for performance: The valence (or desirability) of good performance on performance dimension j. Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedJournal of Retailing ‘An example of a retailing application of the model would be: The motivation (M,) of an employee to offer assistance to a customer (task i) isa function of the employee's expectancy (E,) that the assistance will lead to a purchase decision (performance dimension /) and the valence (V,) or desirability of the sale for the employee. The multiplicative na- ture of the model indicates that if the employee is low on either com- ponent, the motivation level with respect to task j will be low. The valence of performance outcomes (V,) is predicted as follows: Vz 3 (x) 3) where: J,,=instrumentality: The employee's estimate of the likelihood that at- taining an improved performance level on performance dimen- sion j will lead to reward k. This reward is often referred to as a second-level outcome. V, steward valence: The valence (or desirability) of obtaining in- creased amounts of reward k. The expectancy motivation, or force, model has received consider- able empirical support in tests among nonmarketing employees (Camp- bell, Dunnette, Lawler, and Weick 1970; Lawler 1968; Nebeker and Mitchell 1974; Porter and Lawler 1968; Schuster, Clark, and Rogers 1971). Furthermore, Oliver (1974) found considerable support for the expectancy model in tests among industrial personnel. ANTECEDENTS OF INSTRUMENTALITY PERCEPTIONS The expectancy model suggests that an important factor influencing employees’ motivation is the magnitude of their instrumentality esti- mates—the degree to which they perceive linkages between positive per- formance and reward. Because of this, Walker, Churchill, and Ford (1977) hypothesized that the magnitude of the industrial salesperson’s instrumentality estimates is positively related to the degree to which this, person is compensated by sales commissions, the degree to which the person is internal-control-oriented, and the person’s intellectual ability. Recently, some empirical support was found for an expanded version of the Walker, Churchill, and Ford (1977) model, in which it was hypothe- sized that the magnitude of the salesperson’s instrumentality estimates is a function of organizational, task, and personal characteristics (Teas 1981a). ~— Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReseedMotivation of Retail Salespeople Organizational Factors The theoretical and empirical literature indicates that four organiza- tional variables—leader consideration, leader initiation of structure, salesforce participation in decision making, and the provision of per- formance feedback—may be potential predictors of instrumentality perceptions. These variables are defined as follows: © Consideration: The degree to which the leader develops a work cli- mate of psychological support, mutual trust and respect, and friend- Jiness (Gibson, Ivancevich, and Donnelly 1973). ‘© Initiation of structure: The degree to which the leader structures and defines his or her role and the role of subordinates in job activities such as specifying procedures and assigning tasks (Gibson et al. 1973). * Participation: The degree to which the employee is able to influence decisions about the job. © Organizational feedback: Performance evaluation information pro- vided to the employee that is organizationally mediated. Much theoretical and empirical evidence indicates that leaders who use leadership styles characterized by high consideration and initiation of structure will have a positive impact on employees’ instrumentality perceptions (House 1971; James, Hartman, Stebbins, and Jones ieee Teas 1981a). In addition, a substantial amount of theoretical and em- pirical evidence shows that superior/ subordinate communication via participation and performance feedback is positively related to employ- ees’ instrumentality perceptions (Arnold 1976; Hackman and Oldham 1976; Lawler 1969; Lowin 1968; Sims, Szilagyi, and McKemey 1976; Teas 1981a; Vroom 1964; Wood 1973). Task Characteris The results of several studies indicate that task characteristics, par- ticularly job-enrichment factors, may be positively related to the em- ployees’ estimates of instrumentalities (Hackman and Lawler 1971; Hackman and Oldham 1976; James, Hartman, Stebbins, and Jones 1977; Sims, Szilagyi, and McKemey 1976; Teas 198 1a). Consequently, the following job-enrichment framework, based upon the core job di- mensions identified and defined by Hackman and Oldham (1976), was included in the model examined in this study: Copyright © 2001 All Rights Reservedee ————C =e Journal of Retailing eer ‘© Skill variety: The degree to which a job requires a variety of dif- ferent activities in carrying out the work, which involve the use of a number of different skills and talents of the person. @ Task identity: The degree to which the job requires completion of a ‘whole’ and identifiable piece of work; that is, doing a job from beginning to end with a visible outcome. Task significance: The degree to which the job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of other people, whether in the im- mediate organization or in the external environment. ¢ Autonomy: The degree to which the job provides substantial free- dom, independence, and discretion to the individual in scheduling the work and in determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out. ‘* Feedback: The degree to which carrying out the work activities required by the job results in the individual obtaining direct and clear information about the effectiveness of his or her perform- ance. Jobs that are rated high on these dimensions are generally considered to be enriched jobs with high motivational potential. Locus of Control A personality characteristic that has been theoretically and empiri- cally linked (Teas 1981a; Walker, Churchill, and Ford 1977) to sales- force motivation is the salesperson’s locus-of-control beliefs. The con- cept of locus of control concerns the degree to which the individual believes the events in his or her life are internally (c.g., personally) controlled or externally controlled by forces outside the individual (Rotter 1966). Walker, Churchill, and Ford (1977) hypothesized that salespeople who are oriented toward internal control beliefs can be expected to perceive stronger performance-outcome relationships (in- strumentalities) than salespeople who hold external control beliefs. Teas (1981a) found some support for this hypothesis in an empirical study of industrial salesforce motivation. Predictor Variable Interaction The path/ goal theory of leadership (House 1971; House and Dessler 1974) suggests that the leader’s initiation of structure will be more posi- Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedMotvation of Retail Salespeople tively related to the employee's instrumentality perceptions in non- routine, complex jobs, The primary rationale for this hypothesis is that the initiation of structure will reduce the inherent role ambiguity in nonroutine jobs by clarifying the paths between effort and valent re- wards. This hypothesis suggests possible interaction effects between job characteristic and initiation of structure for both expectancy and instrumentality estimates. There is some empirical evidence supporting this hypothesis. (See House and Dessler 1974 for a survey of this empirical evidence.) Other research evidence suggests that leader consideration may mod- erate the relationship between leader initiation of structure and the subordinate’s job perceptions. Research results reported by O'Reilly and Roberts (1978) indicated that initiation of structure was positively related to the subordinate’s job satisfaction only when leader considera- tion was high. Fleishman and Harris (1955) found an interaction effect between consideration and initiation of structure in the determination of employee grievances and turnover. The results suggested that a posi- tive relationship between (1) the leader's initiation of structure and (2) employee grievances and turnover was stronger when consideration was low than when it was high, Schriesheim and Murphy (1976) found the leader's initiation of structure to be negatively related to the sub- ordinate’s job performance when leader consideration was low. On the basis of this evidence, the following hypotheses were examin- ed in this study: H,: The degree to which the retail salesperson is internal-control- oriented is positively related to the magnitude of the salesper- son's instrumentality estimates. The degree to which the retail salesperson’s supervisor provides consideration is positively related to the magnitude of the sales- person's instrumentality estimates. H,: The degree to which the retail salesperson’s supervisor initiates structure is positively related to the magnitude of the salesper- son's instrumentality estimates. H,: The degree to which the retail salesperson receives performance feedback from the organization is positively related to the mag- nitude of the salesperson’s instrumentality estimates. H.: The degree to which the retail salesperson is allowed to partici- pate in organizational decisions affecting his or her job is posi- Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedJournal of Retailing tively related to the magnitude of the salesperson’s instrumental- ity estimates. H,: The degree to which the retail salesperson’s job is characterized by high skill variery, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and task-mediated feedback is positively related to the magni- tude of the salesperson’s instrumentality estimates. FIGURE | Hypothesized Relationship Internal control Orientation | Leader Consideration | Salesforce Participation Instrumentality Estimates } Performance Feedback Task Characteristics (1) Variety (2) Identity (3) Significance (4) Autonomy (5) Feedback Initiation of Structure (1) Task Variety (2) Leader Consideration 10 ee Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedMotivation of Retail Salespeople H,:Initiation of structure will be more strongly positively related to the retail salesperson’s instrumentality estimates under con- ditions of: a. High perceived task variety b. High leader consideration ‘The relationships suggested by these hypotheses are displayed in Fig- ure I. SURVEY METHODOLOGY Data The data were collected from the nonsupervisory sales personnel of four members of a department store chain via survey questionnaires distributed at the stores. Accompanying the questionnaires were a cover letter from the reseacher promising complete confidentiality, a cover letter from the store manager requesting employee participation, and a stamped return envelope addressed to the researcher. Initial distribu- tion of the questionnaire and one follow-up reminder postcard yielded usable responses from 93 employees, for a response rate of 56 percent. Measurement Locus of control was measured by an abbreviated form of Rotter’s (1966) “Internal-External Locus of Control Scale.” The scale, designed by Valecha (1975), is composed of eleven items from the original Rotter (1966) instrument. Although a reliability coefficient of .70 for the Valecha scale was reported in a study on industrial salespersonnel (Teas 1981a), there is a general lack of evidence concerning the reliabil- ity and internal consistency of the scale (Robinson and Shaver 1973). The numerical coding scheme used resulted in higher scores being associated with greater internal control orientation. Leader initiating structure and consideration was measured by the Halpin and Winer (1973) version of the “Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire” (LBDQ). The only modification of the scale consisted of substituting the words “store employees” for “crew members.” The LBDQ incorporates participation in the domain of the consideration variable (House and Dessler 1974; Halpin and Winer 1973). However, a second measure of participation (see Teas 1981b for a description of the scale) was included in the research instrument to assure that the participation concept was adequately measured in this study. The mea- sure consisted of a slightly modified version of a scale developed by Hackman and Oldham (1974). Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedJournal of Retailing The Teas (1981b) modified version of the Hackman and Oldham (1974) “Feedback from Agents” scale was used to measure organiza- tional feedback. Preliminary interviews with retail employees indicated that the domain of organizational feedback may include feedback from the employee’s immediate supervisor and store management other than. the immediate supervisor. Consequently, items were included in the feedback scale so that both feedback sources would be represented in the measure. The core task description variables of the Hackman and Oldham (1974) “Job Diagnostic Survey Instrument” were used to measure the respondent's perceptions of the core task variables. The modifications of the measures consisted of slight changes in wording based upon the results of previous research using the Hackman and Oldham (1974) scales for retail personnel (Teas 1981). Instrumentality estimates were measured by a modified series of items developed by Teas (1981a). The modifications, based upon recommendations by management and sales personnel, were necessary to clarify the meaning of some of the items, to make them correspond more closely to the situation in the retail chain, and to meet strict ques- tionnaire-length restrictions imposed by management. As suggested by Walker, Churchill, and Ford (1977), the average magnitude of the employee's instrumentality estimates was used to operationalize the instrumentality variable. The item list consisted of second-level out- comes oriented toward higher-order needs, such as achievement, and lower-order needs, such as security. The scale used to quantify the in- strumentality associated with each second-level outcome consisted of probability estimates ranging from “I = no chance” to “5 = certain to occur.” Measurement Analysis Previous research indicates that motivation is multidimensional (Deci 1971, 1972; James, Hartman, Stebbins, and Jones 1977; Teas 1981a; Walker, Churchill, and Ford 1977). For example, researchers who have separated second-level outcomes into intrinsic (self- or task- mediated) and extrinsic (externally mediated) outcomes have found that in rewards may be more strongly related to job satisfaction than extrinsic rewards. In addition, Teas (1981a) factor-analyzed the instrumentality scores of 27 second-level outcomes in a study of indus- trial salespeople and found five instrumentality factors—self-fulfill- ment, company relationships, customer relationships, direct perfor- aes oo Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedMotivation of Retail Salespeople mance recognition, and job status. Separate regression estimates of instrumentality predictor equations for the five instrumentality factors revealed considerable differences across equations in terms of both ex- plained variance (R2) and statistically significant predictor variables. Because of this evidence, the 24 item scores were factor-analyzed to determine if they could be represented by a reduced set of dimensions. The factor analysis (see Table 1), using varimax rotation, resulted in four factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0. Four of the factors were very similar to factors found in previous research on salespeople (Teas 1981a): self-fulfillment (eigenvalue = 7.968), company relationships (eigenvalue = 1.890), direct performance recognition (eigenvalue = 1.054), and job status (eigenvalue = 934). The primary difference bet- ween the factor analysis results in this study and the Teas (1981a) study was the emergence of a “growth” instrumentality factor (eigenvalue = 1.288) instead of a “customer relationships” factor. Similar to previous research on sales personnel (Teas 1981a), fourin- strumentality variables were formed by summing the item instrumental- ity scores corresponding to the four instrumentality factors with eigen- values greater than 1.0. In addition, a global instrumentality variable was formed by summing the four instrumentality component scores. The participation measure was strongly correlated (r > .74) with the consideration measure. This was expected because the consideration measure used included participative leadership within its domain. The separate participation variable, therefore, was droppd from the models. Previous research indicates that the core task variable dimensions may vary across occupational categories (Dunham, Aldag, and Brief 1977). Consequently, as recommended by Dunham, Aldag, and Brief (1977), the 15 items comprising the five task dimensions were factor- analyzed using varimax rotation (see Tables 2 and 3). The analysis re- vealed four dimensions which correspond to the a priori categories: “variety” (three items), “autonomy” (two items), “feedback” (three items), and “significance” (two items). An “identity” factor was not found, so that variable was dropped from the predictor equations. The internal consistency of all the variables was analyzed by calcula- ting alpha coefficients. It is important to note, however, the alpha coef- ficients for the instrumentality and core task variables are slightly up- wardly biased because the same data were used in the factor analysis and the reliability analysis, All the alpha coefficients were close to or exceeded .70; therefore, the variables were considered to be appropriate for further analysis 13 Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedJournal of Retailing TABLE | Instrumentality Measures: Factor Analysis Results” Below is a list of potential results of good performance on your job. What is the likelihood that doing an exceptionally good job will lead to each of the following results for you in your present job? A. Self-fulfillment (eigenvalue = 7.968; percent of variance explained Increased personal prestige Increased feeling of self-esteem Increased sense of accomplishment Increased sense of achievement A feeling that I am making good use of my skills and abi . Feelings of self-fulfillment B. Company relationships (eigenvalue = 1.890; percent of variance explained = 7.8) 1. More respect from fellow employees 2. Increased opportunity to develop close friendships with other employees in this organization 3. Better working relationships with co-workers 4. Increased independence from supervision C. Growth (eigenvalue = 1.288; percent of variance explained = 5.4) 1. Increased opportunity for independent thought and action 2. Increased opportunity for personal growth and development D. Direct performance recognition (eigenvalue = 1.054; percent of variance explained = 4.4) 1. Increased pay 2. Increased opportunity for influencing store management decisions 3. Receiving recognition for good performance from store management E. Job status (eigenvalue = 0.934; percent of variance explained = 3.9) 1. Increased chance of promotion to a management position 2. Being involved in training other employees 3, Increased likelihood of being transferred to a store with more potential 3.2) oe eeye @ The categories of instrumentality items were obtained via factor analysis of 24 items. “The criterion for item selection was a high factor loading (greater than .40) on only one factor. The following items failed to meet the item selection criterion: 1. Fewer complaints from my customers Increased job security Increased opportunity to develop close friendships with my customers More authonty in my job | Better working relationships with store managers and supervisors Better working relationships with my customers 2. 3 4 5 14 Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedMotivation of Retail Salespeople TABLE 2 Core Task Variables The A Priori Dimensions” A. Variety 1. My job requires me to use a number of complex or sophisticated skills. 2. My job is simple and repetitive. 3. My job requires me to do different things that require the use of a variety of skills and talents, B. Identity 4, My job requires a lot of cooperative work with other people. 5. My job is designed so that I do only a part of the job of serving customers ~I do not have a chance to see that all the customer's needs are met while he (she) is in the store. 6. My job provides me with the chance to finish completely any work I start. C. Autonomy 7. My job denies me any chance to use my personal i carrying out the work.? 8. My job gives me considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in my work. 9. Thave a lot of freedom on my job to decide on my own how to go about doing the work D. Feedback 10. Just doing the work required by the job provides many chances for me to figure out how well I am doing. 11. The job itself provides very few clues about whether or not 1am perform- ing well. 12. Just doing my job itself provides me with information about my work performance. The actual work itself provides clues about how well I am doing-aside from any feedback co-workers or supervisors may provide E. Significance 13. My job is one where a lot of other people can be affected by how well my work gets done. 14. My job itself is nor very important in the overall operations of the store. # 15. My job is an important job in that the results of my work signifi- cantly affect the lives or well-being of other people. itiative or judgment in @The stems were not grouped on the questionnaire by construct category. The scaling procedure consisted of a 6-point scale ranging from “very inaccurate” (coded 1) to “very accurate” (coded 6). ° The scale was reversed so that larger values reflected greater amounts of the task characteristic, iE! Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedJournal of Retailing TABLE 3 Factor Analysis Results for the Core Task Variables Factors A priori Ttem variables __num. Autonomy Significance _ Feedback _Variety_ Variety 1 164 ~172 VW be 2 087 336 090 ($29) a 209 ao 022 (.624) Identity 4 066 095 213 158 5 =125 .238 387 164 6 059 034 078 337 Autonomy 7 (.752) 172 146, 120 8 (884) ~~ 108 114 107 9 366 .209 024 285 Feedback 10 089 004 (.675) 048 I 159 0S7 (.660) 022 a 077 =.083 (435) 008 Significance 13 036 (783) 034 ~.161 14 400 247 083 engl 15 193 (897) 001 124 Eigenvalues 3.141 1631 1.158 1.016 Percentage of total variance explained 20.9% 10.9% 7.7% 6.8% Items in parentheses were used for the task dimension measures. RESULTS ‘The model examined in this study consisted of a set of predictor variables plus two interaction terms hypothesized to be related to the retail salesperson’s instrumentality perceptions. Consequently, hier- archical multiple regression analysis was used to test the hypotheses. The main effect variables were entered into the equation first, and then the interaction terms were entered into the equation to determine if they significantly increased the explained variance of the dependent variable beyond that explained by the original set of predictor variables. The statistical test used to determine the significance of the interaction terms was the standard hierarchical F test (Cohen and Cohen 1975). 16 oe Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedMotivation of Retail Salespeople The instrumentality equations were: 1= BIE+ B,CN+ BJIS+ B,OF+ B,.TV+ B.TS+ B,TA+B,TF I= BIE+ B,CN+ B,IS+ B,OF+ B.TV+ B,TS+* B,TA+ B,TF+ ByIXV + BIXC where: instrumentality IE =inner directedness onsideration initiation of structure and task variety interaction IX C=initiation of structure and consideration interaction =standardized partial regression coefficient The hierarchial multiple regression analysis indicated that the inter- action terms did not produce a significant increase in explained vari- ance; consequently, the estimates of the main effects equations are the appropriate estimates to interpret. There was some multicollinearity among the explanatory variables (see Table 4). Therefore, cross-validation procedures recommended by Green and Tull (1978) were used to examine the stability of the regres- sion results. As those authors recommended, 30 percent (26 cases) were TABLE 4 Pai ¢ Correlation among the Predictor Variables Predictor variables IE CN IS OF TV_TS TA TF JE: Internal/external orientation 10 CN: Leader consideration .19 1.0 IS: Initiation of structure -.01 32 1,00 OF: Organizational feedback 04 44 12 1,00 TV: Task variety 25.09 11.25 1.00 TS: Task significance AT 07-05 11.33 1.00 TA: Task autonomy 3432-12 30 23 23 1.00 ‘TF: Task feedback 33-0118 18 03.24 30 Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedJournal of Retailing held out of the estimation sample. The remaining observations, the 70 percent sample, were used to estimate the main effects regression equa- tions. The regression equations estimated via the 70 percent sample were then compared with the equations estimated via the 100 percent sample to determine the stability of the structural parameter estimates. The results of these procedures indicated that the relative sizes of he standardized partial regression coefficients and the patterns of co- efficients of determination for the global instrumentality equation and the four instrumentality component equations exhibited considerable stability. A second question concerning the stability of the estimates pertained to the degree to which the estimates were similar across subgroups of the sample. This was an important question because the sample used in this study, although containing only retail sales employees, was composed of individuals who differed in respect to such factors as age, length of employment, and part-time or full-time status. The stability of the esti- mates of the global instrumentality model across different subgroups of the sample was examined via a series of three Chow (1960) tests. The specific comparisons made were older versus younger employees (div- ided at the mean age); length of employment (divided at the mean num- ber of years employed by the organization as a salesperson); and num- ber of hours worked per week (divided at the mean number of hours). A statistically significant Chow (1960) test would be evidence that the regression estimates for the two groups being compared (for example, older versus younger employees) were different. A statistically insigni- ficant Chow (1960) test would be evidence that the estimates for the two groups being compared were not statistically significantly different. ‘None of the Chow tests was even marginally significant (p < .10), which indicated that pooling all the respondents into one sample for the regression estimates was justified. The estimate of the global instrumentality equation, presented in Table 5, shows that the model explained approximately 39 percent of the variance of the global instrumentality variable. The estimates of the four instrumentality component variables are presented in Table 6. The coefficients of determination (R’) for those estimates ranged from .194 (for the company relationships equation) to .396 (for the performance recognition equation). In addition to the separate multiple regression estimates of the four component instrumentality variables, canonical correlation analysis was used to examine the overall relationship bet- ween the predictor variables and the instrumentality variables. The results of the analysis indicated that two of the canonical correlation 18 ——_ — —_ —tooight © 2001 AllRights ReservedMotivation of Retail Salespeople CO Oe ec’ TABLE 5 Global Instrumentality Estimates Standardized partial Predictor regression variables coefficients = IE: Internal/external orientation 328 3.238 Leader consideration 4195 1.7165 Initiation structure 038 373 Organizational feedback 142 1,363° Task variety 4165 1.635¢ Task significance 154 1.613 Task autonomy ~034 ~322 Task feedback 094 891 391 * p< for a one-tal test. ” p<.05 for a one-tail test £ p<.10 for a one-tail test coefficients were statistically significant (p<.01) and the third canoni- cal correlation coefficient was marginally significant(p<.07). Examina- tion of the standardized canonical weights and the structural correla- tions corresponding to each of the canonical variate pairs indicated that the dominant dependent variables in the first variate were performance recognition and growth instrumentalities. The dominant dependent variables in the second and third variates were self-fulfillment instru- mentality and company relationships instrumentality, respectively. In general, the interpretive results of the canonical analysis were similar to the results of the regression analysis; consequently, only the regres- sion results are reported in this paper. Internal orientation was found to be significantly positively re- lated to global instrumentality and to each of the instrumentality com- ponent variables, These findings supported the hypothesis that internal-control-oriented people tend to perceive stronger linkages between job performance and rewards than external-control-oriented people. The findings indicated that leader consideration was significantly positively related to the global instrumentality variable and to the growth and performance recognition instrumentality component vari- ables. In contrast, initiation of structure was a significant predictor 19 Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedJournal of Retailing TABLE 6 Instrumentality Components Estimates: Standardized Partial Regression Coefficients and t-Values * Direct Predictor Self- Company performance variables fulfillment relationships __ Growth __recognition IE 230 239 259 241 (2.141)" (2,052) (2.318) (2.386)? cN -.148 -.002 326 321 (1.232) (-.000) (2.598)° (2.832) Is 183 =127 -.054 085 (1.696) (1.081) (836) OF 047 159 240 (425) (1.325)4 (2.316)? Tv 252 026 AIT (2.360) (.228) (1.161) Ts 210 137 129 (2.079 (1.245) (1.355)¢ TA 026 -.028 -.034 -.056 (235) (237) (292) (539) TF 090 161 195 -.126 (811) (1.3244 (1.674) (-1.197) R? 317 194 259 396 = tovalues are in parentheses. © p<.05 for a one-tail test. © pl for a one-tal test. 4 p<.10 for a one-tail test. variable only in the self-fulfillment equation. Consequently, substantial support for the hypothesized positive consideration-instrumentality relationship was found, while only minor support was found for the hypothesized positive linkage between initiation of structure and instru- mentality. Organizational feedback was found to be significantly positively related to the performance recognition instrumentality component variable and marginally significantly related to the global and company relationships instrumentality variables. This supported the hypotheses that the provision of performance feedback will be positively related to the employee's instrumentality perceptions. 20 ee Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedMotivation of Retail Salespeople The results indicated that task variety and task significance were significantly positively related to the self-fulfillment instrumentality variable. Task significance was also found to be positively related mar- ginally significantly to the performance recognition variable, while task feedback was found to be similarly related to the company relationships instrumentality variable and to be significantly positively related to the growth instrumentality variable. No evidence was found of a signifi- cant task autonomy and instrumentality linkage. DISCUSSION Before exploring the implications of this preliminary study, two im- portant limitations must be emphasized. First, a limited sample of sales- people was used; consequently, caution is necessary in making generali- zations from these results. Second, most of the variables examined in this study consisted of subjective beliefs, which sometimes differ from objective reality. The managerial implication of the findings, therefore, are limited to the extent that the relationship between objective reality and subjective beliefs is uncertain. The results of the factor analysis of the task characteristics and instru- mentality items were encouraging. First, the results of factor analysis of the core task items indicated that, except for the “identity” dimension, the retail sales job may be definable in terms of the Hackman and Old- ham (1974) core task variable framework, Second, factor analysis of the instrumentality items resulted in a set of instrumentality dimensions which were similar to those found in previous research on industrial sales personnel. This indicated that there may be considerable stability in the factor structures of instrumentality perceptions across selling jobs. Thus the instrumentality framework used in this study may be use- ful in future research on sales personnel. As in previous research on industrial sales personnel, internal-control orientation was found to be positively related to the retail salesperson’s instrumentality estimates. Furthermore, the findings indicated a part- icipatory, considerate supervisory style was positively related to the re- tail salesperson’s beliefs that good performance will be rewarded. This finding, which is similar to the results of research on industrial sales- people (Teas 1981a), supported House's (1971) hypothesis that highly considerate leaders will be perceived by their subordinates as possessing a larger range of rewards—an observation that will have a positive ef- fect on the subordinate’s belief that improved performance will result in greater rewards, On the other hand, little evidence of a linkage between initiation of structure and instrumentality was found in this study. 21 Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedJournal of Ret In contrast to previous research (Teas 1981a) on industrial sales- people, the provision of performance feedback was found to be posi- tively related to the employee's instrumentality perceptions. According to Lawler’s (1969) rationale, the strongest relationship should have occ- urred for the feedback/self-fulfillment instrumentality linkage. How- ever, in this study the significant linkages between feedback and instru- mentality occurred in the lower-order need areas: company relation- ships and direct performance rewards. Perhaps this resulted from the fact that the provision of performance evaluation information to the retail sales employee clarifies the company’s performance expectations and indicates to the employee that performance is monitored and is important. This clarification of expectations and assurance that good (or poor) performance will be noticed may increase the retail employee's belief that increased performance will be rewarded via extrinsic reward sources. The findings indicated that the retail salesperson's instrumentality perceptions were positively related to the salesperson’s belief that his or her job is significant and has variety. These job enrichment factors appear to be most strongly related to the salesperson’s self-fulfillment instrumentalities. ‘Although the findings are encouraging, it is important to recognize that this preliminary study examined only a part of the expectancy model, Although additional research is clearly needed in the area of re- tail employee instrumentality perceptions, additional research is also needed concerning the expectancy and valence portions of the expec- tancy model. Furthermore, only the magnitude of the retail salesper- son’s instrumentality estimates was examined. As suggested in the Wal- ker et al. (1977) model of industrial salesforce motivation, the accuracy of these estimates also has important motivational consequences and, therefore, should be examined in future studies. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this study was to examine ways in which retail store management may be able to influence the retail sales empolyee’s level of motivation by affecting the employee's performance-reward instru- mentality beliefs. Instrumentality beliefs, which represent an important component of the expectancy theory of motiviation, concern the degree to which the employee believes improved job performance will be re- warded. These rewards may include many things, such as increased pay, promotion, improved relationships with other store employees, and ee Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedMotivation of Retail Salespeople increased feelings of self-esteem. According to the expectancy theory, increased instrumentality beliefs can be expected to be associated with increased motivation. The factors examined as potential influencers of retail sales em- ployee’s instrumentality beliefs were derived from previous research on industrial salespeople and included leadership style, organizational communication, job characteristics, and the employee's locus-of-con- trol beliefs (the individual's beliefs concerning the degree to which he or she has personal control over life events). The data used in the study consisted of a mail survey of the sales personnel of four department stores. A total of 93 employees, repre- senting a response rate of 56 percent, participated in the study. The findings indicated that employee participation in decision making, the leader's consideration, the provision of performance feed- back, and job enrichment may be positively related to the retail sales- person's beliefs that improved performance will be rewarded. Further- more, employees who believed they had personal control over life events tended to perceive stronger performance/reward linkag Although only a limited sample of retail salespeople was used in this preliminary study, the findings suggest several managerial implications. First, the results indicated that a number of findings concerning indus- trial salesforce motivation may be applicable in the retail setting. Consequently, the industrial salesforce literature may be a useful re- source for retail management researchers and practitioners. Second, the findings indicated that the use of participatory, considerate, per- sonal-relationships-oriented supervisory styles may increase retail sales employees’ motivation, and therefore increase productivity. Therefore, encouraging these leadership qualities via personnel selection and training programs may be justified. Third, a policy of periodically pro- viding performance evaluation feedback to store salespersons may in- crease motivation by clarifying management's performance expecta- tions. Fourth, the results indicated that retail managers may be able to increase retail salespeople’s level of motivation by enriching the sales jobs, particularly by increasing the perceived variety and significance associated with the job. Fifth, evidence was found that management's efforts to fill retail sales jobs with internal-control-oriented individuals may positively affect salesforce motivation. A limitation of this preliminary study is that the variables examined consisted of subjective beliefs, which sometimes differ from objective reality. Hence managerial efforts to change objective reality may not always result in changes in salespersons’ subjective beliefs, Pal Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedJournal of Retailing REFERENCES Amold, Hugh J. (1976), “Effects of Performance Feedback and Extrinsic Reward upon High Intrinsic Motivation,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 17 (December), 275-288 Bellenger, Danny N., Thomas J. Stanley, and John W. Allen (1977), “Food Retailing in the 1980's: Problems and Prospects,” Journal of Retailing, 53 (Fall), 59-70, 112. Burstiner, Irving (1975-1976), “Current Personnel Practices in Department Stores,” Journal of Retailing, 51 (Winter), 3-13, 85-86. Campbell, J.P., M. D. Dunnette, E. E. Lawler, and K. E, Weick, Jr.(1970), Managerial Behavior, Performance, and Effectiveness, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company Chow, Gregory C. (1960), “Tests of Equality between Sets of Coefficients in Two Lincar Regressions,” Econometrics, 28 (July), 591-607. Churchill, Gilbert A., Jr., Neil M. Ford, and Orville C. Walker, Jr. (1981), “Managing the Retail Salesforce,” in Ronald W. Stampfl and Elizabeth C. Hirschman (eds.), Theory in Retailing Traditional and Nontraditional Sources, Chicago: American Marketing Association, Claxton, John D., and J. R. Brent Ritchie (1979), “Consumer Prepurchase Shopping Problems: A Focus on the Retail Component,” Journal of Retailing, 55 (Fall), 24-43. Cohen, Jacob, and Patricia Cohen (1975), Applied Multiple Regression/ Correlation ‘Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Deci, Edward L.. (1971), “Effects of Externally Mediated Rewards on Intrinsic Motiva- tion,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18 (April), 105-115, —, (1972), “Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Reinforcement, and Inequity,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 22 (April), 113-120. Dunham, Randall B., Ramon J, Aldag, and Arthur P. Brief (1977), “Dimensionality of Task Design as Measured by the Job Diagnostic Survey,” Academy of Management Journal, 20 (Sune), 209-223. Fleishman, E. A., and E. F. Harris (1955), Leadership and Supervision in Industry, Co- jumbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Education Research. Gibson, James L., John M. Ivancevich, and James H. Donnelly, Jr.(1973), Organization, Structure, Processes, Behavior, Dallas:Business Publications, Inc. Green, Paul E., and Donald S. Tull (1978), Research for Marketing Decisions, 4th e4., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, Inc. Hackman, Richard J., and Edward E. Lawler, III (1971), “Employee Reactions to Job Characteristics," Journal of Applied Psychology, $5 (Sune), 259-286. —, and Greg R. Oldham (1974), “The Job Diagnostic Survey: An Instrument for the Diagnosis of Jobs and the Evaluation of Job Design Projects,” Technical Report No.4, New Haven: Yale University, Department of Administrative Sciences. —, and ———- (1976), “Motivation through the Design of Work: Test of a Theory,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16 (August), 250-259 Halpin, Andrew W., and B, James Winer (1973), “A Factorial Study of the Leader Be- havior Descriptions,” in Ralph M. Stogdill and Alvin E. Coons (eds.), Leader Be- havior: Its Description and Measurement, Columbus: Ohio State University, Bureau of Business Rescarch Hansen, Robert A., and Terry Deutscher (1977-1978), “An Empirical Investigation of ‘Attribute Importance in Retail Store Selection,” Journal of Revailing, 53 (Winter), 59-72. 24 Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedMouvation of Retail Salespeople House, Robert J.(1971), “A Path-Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 16 (September), 321-338. and Gary Dessler (1974), “The Path-Goal Theory of Leadership: Some Post Hoc and A Priori Tests.” in James G. Hunt and Lars L, Larson (eds.), Contingency Ap- proaches to Leadership, Carbondale. Southern Ilinois University Press. James, Lawrence R., Alan Hartman, Michael W. Stebbins. and Allan P. Jones (1977), Relationships between Psychological Climate and a VIE Model for Work Motivation,” Personnel Psychology, 30 (Autumn), 229-254. Jolson, M_A., and W. F. Spath (1973), “Understanding and Fulfilling Shoppers’ Re- quirements An Anomaly in Retailing™ Journal of Retailing, 40 (Summer), 38-50. Lawler, Edward E., 111 (1968), “A Correlational-Causal Analysis of the Relationship between Expectancy Attitudes and Job Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 22 (Winter), 426-435, ——— (1969), “Job Design and Employee Motivation,” Personnel Psyhology, 22(Win- ter), 426-435. Lewin, Kurt (1938), The Conceptual Representation and the Measurement of Psycho- logical Forces, Durham, N.C... Duke University Press. Lowin, A. (1968), “Participative Decision Making: A Model, Literature Critique, and Prescription for Research.” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 3 (February), 68-106, Mason, Joseph B. and L. Morris (1978). Modern Retailing Theory and Practice, Dallas Business Publications, Inc. Nebeker, D. M., and T. M. Mitchell (1974), “Leader Behavior: An Expectancy Theory Approach,” Organizational Behavior and Human Peformance, \1 (June), 355-367 Oliver, R. L, (1974), “Expectancy Theory Predictions of Salesmen’s Peformance,” Journal of Markeung Research, 1 (August), 243-253 OReilly, Charles A., II], and Karlene H. Roberts (1978), “Supervisor Influence and Subordinate Mobility Aspirations as Moderators of Consideration and Initiation of Structure,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 63 (February), 96-102. Porter, L. W.,and Edward E, Lawler, III (1968), Managerial Attudes and Performance, Homewood, Il: Dorsey Press. Robinson, John P., and Phillip R. Shaver (1973), Measures of Social Psychological At- tutudes, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research. Rotter, Julian B. (1966), “Generalized Expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement,” Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80. Schriesheim, Chester A., and Charles J. Murphy (1976). "Relationships between Leader Behavior and Subordinate Satisfaction and Performance: A Test of Some Situational Moderators,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 61 (October), 634-641 Schuster, J. R., B. Clark, and M. Rogers (1971), “Testing Portions of the Porter and Lawler Model Regarding the Motivational Role of Pay,” Journal of Applied Psycho- fogy, 55 (June), 187-195, Sims, Henry P., Jr., Andrew D. Szilagyi, and Dale R. McKemey (1976), “Antecedents of Work Related Expectancies,” Academy of Management Journal, 19 (December), 547-559, Teas, R. Kenneth (1981a), “An Empirical Test of Models of Salespersons’ Job Expec- taney and Instrumentality Perceptions.” Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (May), 209-226 — (1981b),"A Test of Model of Department Store Salespeople’s Job Satisfaction,” Journal of Retailing, 57 (Spring). 3-25. 25 Copyright © 2001 All Rights ReservedValecha, G. K. (1975), “Abbreviated 11-Item Rotter IE Scale,” in Measures of Social Psychological Attitudes, John P. Robinson and Phillip R. Shaver (eds.), Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research, Vroom, Victor H. (1964), Work and Monvation, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Walker, Orville C., Jr., Gilbert A. Churchill, Jr., and Neil M. Ford (1977), “Motivation and Performance in Industrial Selling: Present Knowledge and Needed Research,’ Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (May), 156-168. Wood, M. T. (1973), “Power Relationships and Group Decision Making in Organiza- tions,” Psychological Bulletin, 79 (May), 280-293, The New York University Institute of Retail Management announces 1983 Grants for Retailing Research In order to promote substantive and creative research focusing on retailing issues and problems, the Institute of Retail Management will award up to five $2000 grants in 1983. Interested researchers should submit, in triplicate, a detailed proposal which addresses the following: * Objectives * Methodology © Pragmatic Implications © Resource Budget * Schedule of Output Proposals should be prepared in accordance with the guidelines outlined in IRM’s “Research Proposal Style Sheet,” copies of which may be obtained from: Professor Jacob Jacoby, Director, Institute of Retail Management, New York University, 202 Tisch Hall, Washington Square, New York 10003. The deadline for receipt of proposals is June 30 1983. Announcements of the awards will be made on September I. 26 Copyright © 2001 All Rights Reserved