Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

ISSN: 0885-3134 (Print) 1557-7813 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpss20

Organizational Readiness for Change, Individual

Fear of Change, and Sales Manager Performance:
An Empirical Investigation

William A. Weeks, James Roberts, Lawrence B. Chonko & Eli Jones

To cite this article: William A. Weeks, James Roberts, Lawrence B. Chonko & Eli Jones
(2004) Organizational Readiness for Change, Individual Fear of Change, and Sales Manager
Performance: An Empirical Investigation, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 24:1,
7-17, DOI: 10.1080/08853134.2004.10749012

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/08853134.2004.10749012

Published online: 23 Sep 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 579

View related articles

Citing articles: 45 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rpss20
 ORGANIZATIONAL READINESS FOR CHANGE, INDIVIDUAL FEAR OF CHANGE,
AND SALES MANAGER PERFORMANCE: AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
William A. Weeks, James Roberts, Lawrence B. Chonko, and Eli Jones

Sales organizations are experiencing a period of increasing change in the marketplace. Consequently, firms must strive to
develop and implement successful change initiatives. Previous research has had limited success in explaining the factors
that are associated with successful versus unsuccessful change initiatives. This study examines perceptions of an organization’s
readiness for change and individual fear of change as they relate to individual performance. Three hundred and forty-
three sales managers from several industries participated in this study. A significant positive association was found between
a sales manager’s perception of his or her organization’s readiness for change and his or her own job performance. When
taking into consideration a sales manager’s fear of change, the aforementioned relationship between perceived organiza-
tional readiness for change and sales manager job performance is enhanced. Implications for academicians and practitio-
ners are provided along with directions for future research.

The first decade of the new millennium has been forecasted
to be a period of tremendous change in the workplace (Cascio
1995; Gordon et al. 2000; Howard 1995). Successful organi-
zations continually anticipate and manage a variety of change
venues: economic changes due to globalization of markets,
technological changes (i.e., advances in information technol-
ogy), market changes (i.e., rate of change in the composition
of customers and their preferences), political changes (i.e.,
privatization), social changes (i.e., an increasing concern for
the environment), and competitive intensity (e.g., frequent
introduction of new products and shorter product life cycles).
As the rate of change affecting business continues to acceler-
ate, organizations must strive to develop and implement
change initiatives. Organizational change is comprised of those
processes that break down existing structures and create new
structures—often new organizations, cultures, business strat-
egies, and ways of working (Hutchison 2001).
Anderson (1996) asserts that, like organizations, individual
employees who continue to learn and adapt to change will
William A. Weeks (D.B.A., Indiana University), Professor of Mar-
keting, Hankamer School of Business, Department of Marketing,
Baylor University, Bill_Weeks@ baylor.edu.
James Roberts (Ph.D., University of Nebraska), Associate Professor
of Marketing, Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University,
Jim_Roberts@baylor.edu.
Lawrence B. Chonko (Ph.D., University of Houston), Professor of
Marketing, Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University,
Larry_Chonko@baylor.edu.
Eli Jones (Ph.D., Texas A&M University), Associate Professor of
Marketing, C.T. Bauer College of Business, University of Houston,
Eli.Jones@sellingasap.com.
succeed in tumultuous times. Working from Anderson’s as-
sertions, individual sales manager’s perceptions of their orga-
nizations and their own fear of change are the focus of this
paper. Specifically, we will examine to what degree a sales
manager’s perceptions of his or her organization’s readiness to
change is related to his or her individual performance and to
what degree this relationship is moderated by the sales
manager’s fear of change.
READINESS FOR CHANGE
Change initiatives for the purpose of performance improve-
ment and achieving competitive advantage have experienced
a number of problems (Denton 1996; Galpin and Robinson
1997; Geisler 1996; Harari 1997; Lawson 2003). Reasons
for change program shortcomings have been documented for
decades. One long-known explanation for unsuccessful
change initiatives is the tendency of management to seek a
quick fix instead of taking a longer-term perspective (Kilman
1984). Another long-known reason for lack of change suc-
cess is the propensity for organizations to implement piece-
meal solutions rather than taking a systems perspective (Ackoff
1974). Some of the difficulties with change initiatives may
be attributed to deeper, more critical sources, such as the
pervasive culture of the organization and the operating cli-
mate (McNabb and Sepic 1995). An organization’s culture is
the deep-rooted set of values and beliefs that provide norms
for behavior (Deshpande and Webster 1989; Schein 1992).
An organization’s climate refers to the ways organizations
operationalize routine behaviors and the actions that are ex-
pected, supported, and rewarded (Schneider and Rentsch
1988). These two characteristics combine to determine or-
ganizational readiness for change (McNabb and Sepic 1995).
It can be expected that if a firm’s culture and climate are not

Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, vol. XXIV, no. 1 (winter 2004), pp. 7–17.
© 2004 PSE National Educational Foundation. All rights reserved.
ISSN 0885-3134 / 2004 $9.50 + 0.00.
8 Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management
conducive to the acceptance of change, such initiatives will
likely fail regardless of the desires and plans of the more pro-
active management in the firm. When discussing the con-
cept of change, the process of altering people’s actions,
reactions, and interactions to move the organization’s exist-
ing state to some future desired state is paramount (Pettigrew
1990). The primary way to bring about lasting change is to
develop working conditions in which employees can operate
more effectively (McNabb and Sepic 1995).
At the individual level of an organization, and pertinent to
this study, a sales manager’s perceptions of his or her firm’s
readiness for change may impact that manager’s involvement
in implementing any new change initiative (Chonko et al.
2002). Furthermore, a sales manager’s fear of change may also
influence his or her willingness to undertake change initia-
tives. Change threatens one’s stability and continuity. Em-
ployees aware of the need to change still might resist the part
of the initiative that appears too major, risky, or different
(Tapsell and Law 1998). Said another way, fear of failure cre-
ates a fear of learning, which parallels a fear of change and the
need to cling to the present situation (Harari 1999).
The purpose of the research reported here is to examine
change-related factors that may impact sales manager perfor-
mance. First, we refer to the change literature to investigate
the degree to which sales managers’ perception of his or her
firm’s readiness to change influences his or her job perfor-
mance. Second, we introduce a scale for measuring an
individual’s fear of change. Third, we examine whether a sales
manager’s fear of change impacts the hypothesized relation-
ship between perceived organizational readiness to change and
sales managers’ performance. Figure 1 contains the relation-
ships tested in the present study.
We chose to employ sales managers in this study for sev-
eral reasons. First, an organization’s sales force is a primary
source of revenue generation and growth in many firms
(Colletti and Chonko 1997). Second, the sales force is ac-
knowledged as a key change agent in most organizations
(Colletti and Chonko 1997). Third, Hurley (1998) calls for
research regarding leadership characteristics required for ef-
fective change managers in sales organizations. Fourth, middle
management (i.e., sales managers) has often been identified
as the primary locus for resistance to radical change (Biggart
1977; Miles 1997). Finally, Farrand (1998) notes there is a
lack of empirical research linking sales management to over-
all marketing strategy, even though sales managers are a criti-
cal link between upper management, which establishes plans
and strategies, and the sales force, which is expected to imple-
ment plans in the field (Russ, McNeilly, and Comer 1996).
In general, successful change is more likely to occur when
leaders, such as sales managers, support change and encour-
age the support of others, such as the salespeople. An impor-
tant driver in the success of a change initiative is open
Figure 1
Hypothesized Model
communications from the start of the change initiative
(Hutchison 2001). Sales managers help shape opinions, deci-
sions, and actions. They can be influential in the acceptance
of sales force goals (Podsakoff, Mackenzie, and Bommer 1996)
and performance (Crnkovisch and Hesterly 1996). Therefore,
we consider it an important initial step to examine sales man-
agers’ viewpoints about change-related issues.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND
HYPOTHESES
Organizational Readiness for Change and
Job Performance
Historically, studies of sales performance have focused on
determinants of sales performance (Chonko et al. 2000). Pio-
neering work in the area of sales performance by Walker,
Churchill, and Ford (1977) offered a comprehensive model
of salesperson performance. Antecedents of performance in
this model were classified into five categories: (1) personal,
organizational, and environmental factors; (2) motivation;
(3) aptitude; (4) skill levels; and (5) role perceptions (Balaji,
Netemeyer, and Boles 2002). Subsequent research has stud-
ied the above potential antecedents to sales performance in
some detail. Studies of sales performance have explained some
variance in sales performance, substantive unexplained vari-
ance still exists (e.g., Cravens et al. 1993; Sujan, Weitz, and
Sujan 1988). The present study focuses on one antecedent
and one potential moderator of sales manager performance-
perceptions of organization readiness for change and fear of
change.
Employees are at the center of organizational change ini-
tiatives (Tetenbaum 1998). According to Armenakis, Harris,
and Mossholder (1993), the energy, support, and inspiration

required to create the perception among employees that an
organization is ready for change derives from those individu-
als within the organization. Readiness for change has been
defined as “the cognitive precursor to the behaviors of either
resistance to or support for change efforts” (Armenakis, Har-
ris, and Mossholder 1993, pp. 681–682). An individual’s
perception of an organization’s readiness for change is viewed
as a similar concept to unfreezing, which is described as a
process in which an individual’s beliefs and attitudes about
pending change are influenced such that the imminent change
is seen as useful (Lewin 1951). In the present sales context,
perceptions of organizational readiness for change embody
the individual sales manager’s (1) beliefs, attitudes, and in-
tentions regarding the extent to which change is needed, and
(2) perceptions of the organization’s ability to deal with change
under dynamic business conditions (e.g., Armenakis, Harris,
and Mossholder 1993). Sales managers’ assumptions and ex-
pectations regarding change comprise their dispositions con-
cerning their organization’s readiness for change (Wheatley
1992). Spreitzer (1996), Thomas and Velthouse (1990), and
Eby et al. (2000) suggest that perceptions of readiness to
change reflect an individual’s unique interpretation based on
his or her experiences.
When environmental change is pervasive or difficult to
predict, sales organizations have to be capable of rapid change
to survive (cf. D’Aveni 1994). An individual sales manager’s
perceptions of an organization’s readiness for change are af-
fected by his or her perceptions of environmental turbulence
(i.e., rate of change in composition of customers, rate of tech-
nological change, and competitive intensity in the market-
place) and organizational culture, climate, policies, and
practices. When sales organizations encounter a turbulent
business environment, employees such as sales managers may
express concern about their organization’s readiness for change.
For example, if an organization’s structure is perceived as rigid
and inflexible, sales managers are likely to hold unfavorable
views about the organization’s readiness for change. As envi-
ronmental complexity has increased in the past decade, adap-
tation and change have become important research issues
(Gordon et al. 2000). An individual sales manager’s organiza-
tional experiences with change shape how that individual per-
ceives the organization’s readiness for change (Law and
Woodman 1995). For example, during the 1970s, U.S. con-
sumers indicated a preference for gas-efficient automobiles.
As employees of U.S. automobile manufacturers continued
to see their firms investing in large vehicle manufacturing fa-
cilities, one might expect that these employees would perceive
their employers as not interested in accommodating consumer
preferences and not ready to change with the times. Likewise,
in a sales organization, sales managers have preconceived views
about their organization’s readiness for change. Sales manag-
ers following outmoded company mandated rules and regula-
Winter 2004 9
tions in governing their salespeople may perceive their orga-
nizations as not staying current. Similarly, sales organizations
that do not allocate enough funds for sales managers to invest
in the proper technology for their salespeople might also be
perceived as not ready for change by those sales managers.
If a sales manager perceives that his or her organization
fosters an environment that supports change efforts, one might
expect sales managers to be more willing to take risks and
embrace change strategies that might increase performance.
Conversely, if a sales manager perceives that his or her orga-
nization does not foster an environment that supports change
efforts, one might expect sales managers to be less willing to
take risks and embrace change they perceive as possibly hurt-
ing their performance. Therefore, we propose the following
hypothesis:
H1: A sales manager’s perception of the sales organization’s
readiness for change will be positively related to his or her
level of performance.
Moderating Impact of Individual Fear of Change
Up to this point, we have focused on the sales manager’s per-
ceptions of his or her organization’s readiness to change and
the importance of recognizing that sales managers operate at
different levels of readiness for change (Blanchard 1992). In-
dividuals who are more change-ready will be more likely than
others to accept and act on a change initiative. Dan Sweeney,
a vice president at IBM’s retail consultancy practice, is quoted
by Harari regarding this point: “Certainly, to the degree that
knowledge is power and change invalidates that knowledge,
then change robs us of power. Change robs us of our ability
to know and therefore to manage our future. It robs us of our
sense of control over our affairs. The prospect of such a loss
will indeed raise fear and anxiety in the hearts and souls of
executives used to dealing from reliable knowledge and exer-
cising its consequent power” (1999, p. 3). Fear of change is
potentially one reason why employees differ in their willing-
ness to accept change. Indeed, Bennett et al. (1998) assert
that fear of change and the demand of the forces that lead to
fear of change are common in today’s business world.
From a psychoanalytic perspective, a key reason that some
employees do not readily support change is their fear of the
dangers that they believe change entails. In most organiza-
tions, change is imposed top-down. People have a natural
fear of change and when change is mandated they feel a loss
of control (Evans 2001). Eagle (1999) notes that fear of the
unknown is a powerful reason that individuals do not change,
or at least do not change quickly. They fear that change might
entail danger, pain, and anxiety. To many people in an orga-
nization, change initiatives imply a loss of the security that
goes with a specific job. Further, uncertainty associated with
10 Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management
change can heighten an individual’s fear of making mistakes
or showing ignorance. Senge and Kaeufer (2000) note that
change efforts can induce fear. In particular, change processes
that call into question long-held beliefs, attitudes, and ha-
bitual ways of acting can be threatening. Insecurity associ-
ated with change can lead people to hang onto old patterns of
behavior (Kets de Vries and Balazs 1999). The fear of failure
creates a fear of change and the desire to cling to the status
quo. Such thinking often is associated with the assumption
that by replicating the actions of yesterday that brought us
success today, we will achieve success tomorrow. However,
this belief only makes sense if tomorrow will look like yester-
day (Harari 1999). And this is unlikely given the present tur-
bulent business environment in which organizations operate.
With the above research and Baron and Kenny’s (1986)
definition of a moderator variable, one might expect the sales
manager’s fear of change to moderate the perception of orga-
nizational readiness for change–job performance relationship.
If a sales manager perceives the firm is ready to change even
though he or she has a high fear of change, we posit the man-
ager would be more likely to accept change because he or she
can envision higher performance. Alternatively, a sales man-
ager that perceives the sales organization as not ready for
change and has a high fear of change is less likely to accept
change because he or she sees no performance improvement
resulting from the change. Similarly, a sales manager with
low fear of change, who perceives the sales organization as
ready for change, will be more likely to embrace change as he
or she views change will improve performance. However, when
the organization is viewed as not ready for change, a sales
manager with low fear of change will be less likely to see the
change having a positive effect on performance. Therefore,
we suggest the following hypothesis:
H2: Sales manager’s fear of change strengthens the organi-
zational readiness for change–job performance relationship.
METHOD
Sample and Data Collection
A nationwide mailing list comprised of 2,500 sales managers
was used to collect the data to examine the relationships pres-
ently studied. Potential respondents were each sent a mail
survey packet that included a questionnaire and a cover letter
prepared by the researchers. A total of 303 of the question-
naires mailed out were undeliverable. In total, 343 responses
out of 2,197 contacts were obtained, for an overall response
rate of 15.6 percent. Pertinent descriptive statistics from the
obtained sample are provided in Table 1.
For generalizability, we chose a sample that was comprised
of sales managers that spanned a variety of industries. Most
of the survey participants had been with their respective com-
panies for over a decade. The participants also possessed con-
siderable sales experience, having worked in the sales field an
average of almost 20 years. Furthermore, sample respondents
had, on average, almost 25 years of work experience. Taken
together, these tenure statistics indicate a very high level of
experience for the present sample. The average age of 47 is
also indicative of a high level of work experience. Nearly half
of the respondents possess a college degree, with one-fifth
having completed a graduate education.
Nonresponse Bias
The possibility of nonresponse bias was assessed by compar-
ing the first half of the returned surveys with the second half
of the returned surveys. The “wave analysis” examines the as-
sumption that early respondents are more interested in, or
aware of, the topic of study than later respondents who are
more likely to be like nonrespondents (Armstrong and
Overton 1977; Frazier and Rody 1991). For the variables ex-
amined in this study, no significant differences were detected
between those surveys returned early and those returned later.
Measurement Scales
An exploratory factor analysis using varimax rotation was used
in the present study as a partial test of the validity of the
organizational readiness for change, job performance, and in-
dividual fear-of-change scales. All 16 items of the 3 scales
loaded on their respective constructs and there were no sig-
nificant cross-loadings.
Organizational Readiness for Change
Organizational readiness for change was operationalized us-
ing a four-item, five-point Likert scale that assessed a sales
manager’s perception as to how ready his or her company was
to change (see the Appendix for items). The readiness-for-
change scale was based on scales originally developed by Daley
(1991), Hardin (1967), and Trumbo (1961). The composite
measure of the items in this study resulted in a Cronbach’s
alpha of 0.85.
Job Performance
Job performance was measured by using a self-report, seven-
item, five-point Likert scale (see the Appendix for items). Self-
report methods have been used in several sales studies (cf.
Behrman and Perreault 1982; 1984; Chonko, Tanner, and
Weeks 1993; Churchill, Ford, and Walker 1974; Tyagi 1985;
Weeks and Nantel 1992; Weeks and Stevens 1997). The sales
managers were asked to indicate how they compare to other
sales managers working for their company, with responses
 Winter 2004 11

Table 1
Sample Characteristics

Length of Employment
with Current Company Sales Experience Business Experience

Years Percent Years Percent Years Percent

0–1 years 3.8 0–1 years 0.6 0–5 years 2.1

2–5 years 23.0 2–5 years 6.7 6–10 years 5.9
6–10 years 28.2 6–10 years 13.8 11–15 years 10.9
11–15 years 16.8 11–15 years 11.4 16–20 years 12.5
16–20 years 13.5 16–20 years 19.6 21–25 years 22.4
21 or more years 14.7 21 or more years 47.9 More than 25 years 46.2
Mean Years 11.5 Mean Years 19.84 Mean Years 24.64

Income Firms Worked For Age

Level Percent Number Percent Age Percent

Less than $20,000 0.9 1 12.0 30 or less 4.7

$20,000 to $29,999 3.3 2 23.4 31–40 18.9
$30,000 to $39,999 5.5 3 25.4 41–50 40.1
$40,000 to $49,999 10.6 4 to 5 27.9 51–60 30.1
$50,000 to $59,999 8.8 More than 5 11.4 61 or more 6.2
$60,000 to $69,999 9.1
$70,000 to $79,999 7.9 Mean number of Firms 3.31 Mean Age 47.1
$80,000 to $89,999 9.7
$90,000 to $99,999 5.8
$100,000 to $129,999 16.4
$130,000 or more 22.1

Education Size of Firm Worked For

Attainment Percent Size Percent

High School or Less 5.3 1–9 employees 3.8

Some College 26.4 10–49 employees 27.1
College Graduate 47.2 50–99 employees 16.8
Graduate School 21.1 100–249 employees 20.6
250–499 employees 9.1
500–999 employees 5.6
1,000 or more employees 17.1

ranging from “much worse” to “much better.” Sujan, Weitz,
and Kumar (1994) provided the original scale adapted in this
study for use with sales managers. Factor analysis was run on
the seven items confirming that the scale is unidimensional.
The composite measure of the items in this study resulted in
a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.90.
Individual Fear of Change
The individual fear-of-change scale constructed in the cur-
rent study was operationalized by using a five-item, five-point
Likert scale (see the Appendix for items). The sales managers
were asked to indicate their agreement with each item rang-
ing from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree.” Factor analy-
sis was run on the five items suggesting that the scale is uni-
dimensional. The composite measure of the items in this study
resulted in a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.83.
RESULTS
Correlation analysis was conducted for the constructs in this
study. A correlation matrix and descriptive statistics are pro-
vided in Table 2.
To test H1 and H2, job performance was regressed on or-
ganizational readiness for change and individual fear of change
(see Table 3).
As posited, there is a significant association between a sales
manager’s perception of his or her organization’s readiness for
12 Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

Table 2
Correlation Matrix and Descriptive Statistics

Organizational
Readiness to Fear of Standard
Change Change Performance Mean Deviation

Organizational Pearson Correlations 1 0.249** –0.119* 12.1529 3.27953

Readiness to Change N 340 337 297
Fear of Change Pearson Correlations 0.249** 1 –0.264** 11.2544 3.20057
N 337 338 295
Performance Pearson Correlations –0.119* –0.264** 1 27.5503 4.58726
N 297 295 298

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed); ** correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).

Table 3
Regression Results

Hypotheses 1 and 2

Model Beta R2 F t Significance

(Constant) 0.092 9.824 11.698 0.000

RDY –0.505 –2.592 0.010
FEAR –0.764 –3.394 0.001
RDY*FEAR 0.754 2.354 0.019

Notes: Dependent variable: performance (PERF); Independent variables: organizational readiness to change (RDY), individual fear of change (FEAR),
and interaction effect.

change and his or her own job performance (R2 = 0.092, F =
9.824, p < 0.01). Thus, H1 is supported. A sales manager’s
perception of the sales organization’s readiness for change is
significantly and positively related to his or her level of per-
formance. The reason for the negative Beta in Table 3 for this
relationship is due to the wording of the questions. For ex-
ample, the first item used to measure perceived readiness to
change states: “We fail to anticipate employee resistance to
change.” The lowest performance measure is when a sales
manager perceives his or her performance being below 25
percent of their peers. Therefore, the stronger a respondent
agrees that the organization is not ready for change, the lower
he or she assesses his or her own individual performance.
When an individual’s fear of change is taken into consid-
eration, the analysis indicates that this measure does strengthen
the perceived organizational readiness for change–job perfor-
mance relationship. The interaction effect is significant (p =
0.019), thus H2 is supported. The positive Beta indicates that
the relationship specified in H1 is enhanced when an indi-
vidual’s fear of change is taken into consideration. When an
individual is fearful of change, the relationship between per-
ceived organizational readiness to change and performance
will be positively enhanced.
DISCUSSION
One focus of this paper was to determine if there is a relation-
ship between a sales manager’s perception of a sales organiza-
tion’s readiness for change and job performance. A second
focus involved whether this association is moderated by the
sales manager’s fear of change. We found that an individual’s
perception of his or her firm’s readiness for change is posi-
tively related to his or her own job performance. The more
change-ready he or she feels his or her firm is, the higher his
or her own performance. And, conversely, the less change-
ready he or she perceives his or her firm, the lower his or her
own job performance. It is disappointing that we did not find
a stronger relationship between perceived organizational readi-
ness for change and job performance. However, it comes as
no surprise given Churchill et al.’s (1985) meta-analysis that
found an average study accounted for less than 10 percent of
the observed variation in sales performance. Even so, the

present relationship found between perceived organizational
readiness for change and job performance suggests that change-
related variables offer a potentially fruitful area of study.
Another explanation for the failure of previous change ini-
tiatives might lie with the emotional state of a firm’s employ-
ees rather than just their perception of organizational readiness
for change. For this reason, the current study attempted to
determine whether or not an individual’s fear of change has
an impact on the relationship between his or her perception
of his or her firm’s readiness to change and his or her own
performance. Of note, we found that sales managers who were
more fearful of change were also more sensitive to their sales
organizations readiness to change. A perceived readiness to
change on the part of the organization strengthened the rela-
tionship between organizational readiness and performance
for the more fearful sales manager.
The present study also found that an individual sales
manager’s fear of change may be a stronger indicator of per-
formance than their perception of their firm’s readiness for
change. We found that there is a significant relationship be-
tween an individual’s fear of change and his or her perfor-
mance such that fear of change strengthens the relationship
between perception of organization readiness to change and
job performance. This has important implications for an
organization’s recruiting and selection strategy. If management
is hiring personnel who will be working in a very turbulent
business environment that requires periodic employee change,
it might be advisable for management to seek out individuals
who are more receptive to change. In a broad sense, people
do not like surprises. Thus, their first reaction to change is
likely to be resistance as many change programs require em-
ployees to implement them on the day they are announced.
Uncovering fear of change is a preliminary step. And this
first step required an understanding of antecedents to fear of
change. For example, the cry, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” is
a sign of change resistance that might underlie a fear of change.
Similarly, sales managers may simply fear change as they fear
failure might come with the change. In general, change height-
ens emotions and fears that lead to resistance. Thus, it is im-
perative that researchers uncover sources of fear of change that
lead to change resistance. Having recognized the role fear plays
in individual’s outcomes, researchers must focus efforts on
understanding how fear manifests itself in the workplace. One
might be led to the conclusion that training can help. How-
ever, training offers no guarantee that employees fearful of
change will make changes in their work efforts (Rusaw 2000).
Research related to the impact of training should focus on
skills transfer, employee opportunities for change, resources
available to make change, and individual factors (e.g., fear of
change) that can mitigate the desired impacts of training.
Reasons for change resistance vary. One research issue re-
lates to how fear of change manifests itself regarding change
Winter 2004 13
resistance. A discussion of change resistance is beyond the
scope of this paper. However, researchers interested in the
fear of change–resistance to change relationship can begin
their quest by examining the literature on addictive behaviors
(e.g., Tomer 2001) or organizational rationality (e.g., Argyris,
Putnam, and Smith 1991), to mention two potentially in-
sightful and relevant areas of future study.
One responsibility of an organization’s management en-
gaged in change initiatives is disseminating information that
describes what the firm is doing to be change-ready and how
change will benefit employees. The lack of an effective com-
munications strategy may very well be one explanation for
the failure of previous change initiatives. Even though the
organization’s management may have felt they had devel-
oped the necessary strategy to be proactive and sensitive to
change, if lower level employees who are responsible for car-
rying out the strategy do not have knowledge of or confi-
dence in management decisions, change initiatives may not
be successful.
This study also has ramifications for sales force/sales man-
ager interaction. Managers in this study exhibited varying lev-
els of fear of change. That said, as managers, they should
recognize that, like themselves, not every salesperson will sup-
port a change in sales strategies and tactics. For example, sales-
people may view a change as having no immediate impact on
their jobs. Further, they may not view a strategy change as
relevant to all customers. However, allowing salespeople ex-
clusive rights to make that determination can undermine
change success. Leaders who are not involved may be viewed
as nonsupportive. Moreover, existing strategies require cer-
tain competencies of salespeople. Change in strategy may re-
quire different competencies. For example, relationship-based
salespeople develop a comfort with people such as materials
managers, administrative assistants, and buyers. If, with
change, they are expected to adapt a strategic account per-
spective, for example, these salespeople must now become
comfortable with CEOs, CIOs, and CFOs. Finally, like some
of the sales managers in this study, not all salespeople like
change. This is where management’s knowledge of their own
fears of change can be helpful. Simply put, salespeople must
have some incentive to embrace change. “What’s in it for me?”
(WIIFM) cannot be overlooked by management.
In a different venue, but pertinent to this study, a recent
examination of change yielded the following results:
1. changes in culture and work environment and lack of
potential for restructuring represented change
survivors’ greatest fears;
2. staff reductions were the second most-cited fear;
3. leadership changes were the third most-cited fear;
4. most survivors noted that their workload had
increased as a result of change;
14 Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management
5. about one-third of survivors anticipated that their
firms would provide retraining programs;
6. about one-half of survivors were confident in their
job security (HR Focus 2001).
Finally, the presentation of a scale designed to measure an
individual’s fear of change is another important contribution
of the current study. This study contributes to the literature a
short, unidimensional, and reliable scale (alpha of 0.83) to
measure fear of change. Despite the constantly changing busi-
ness environment and the importance of individuals in af-
fecting successful change, prior to this study fear of change
had not been adequately investigated in a work setting.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
As noted by Cronin and Taylor (1992), while every effort has
been made to ensure that the potential threats to the reliabil-
ity and validity of research results are minimized, that does
not ensure that all threats are fully eliminated. Generaliza-
tions beyond the respondents examined should be approached
cautiously. The selection of the specific sample through the
purchase of a mailing list may have introduced a limitation
to the generalizability of the results. Likewise, measurement
issues are always a concern in such research. Having said that,
we are confident that the results reported in this study are an
accurate representation of the relationships described in this
study. All established approaches were used to limit the threats
to the implications produced by the results reported.
Another limitation regarding the sample is its heterogene-
ity. Since the sales managers come from several industries,
they no doubt manage different types of salespeople (Moncrief
1986). Therefore, it might be possible that different sales
managers will evaluate their performance differently accord-
ing to their role and the type of salespeople they manage.
A final concern that should be recognized is that this is a
cross-sectional study. While the results give us some insight
regarding where people stand at a given point in time, it does
not help us understand to what degree they can change re-
garding their responses over time.
There are several opportunities for future research. First,
the proposed model can be extended. One might find it in-
sightful to investigate the antecedents of a sales manager’s
perception of his or her firm’s readiness for change, including
organization culture and climate, market orientation, the
organization’s responsiveness to channel member and ultimate
customer expectations, as well as the financial stability of his
or her company. Second, it might be fruitful to determine if
there are any other variables that impact the influence that an
individual’s fear of change has on the relationship between
organizational readiness for change and job performance. For
example, would the degree of environmental turbulence have
an impact on the aforementioned relationship? One might
argue that the more turbulent the business environment, the
stronger will be the impact of one’s fear of change on the
relationship between organizational readiness for change and
job performance. Third, one might find it interesting to ex-
amine whether the results are consistent when using objec-
tive and subjective performance measures, given they are not
the same (Comer et al. 1999).
Finally, change and learning are inseparable. Like change,
learning resistance offers a fruitful area of study. Fear of change
should be examined as it relates to resistance to learning (e.g.,
Schein 1992). Other barriers to learning include job skills
and lack of previous successful learning experience (Cohen
and Levinthal 1990). Given the common wisdom concern-
ing the challenges of implementing customer relationship
management (CRM) programs, the examination of learning
and change in the context of fear appears to have potential to
offer considerable insight into change disappointments.
CONCLUSION
The focus of this study sheds light on the question, “Does a
sales manager’s perceptions of an organization’s readiness for
change affect key job outcomes?” Positive perceptions of or-
ganizational readiness to change do positively impact a sales
manager’s job performance. Moreover, fear of change moder-
ates the above relationship. Sales managers who are fearful of
change will look closely for signs of organizational readiness
to change. Therefore, fear of change appears to strengthen
the relationship between perceived organizational readiness
to change and sales manager performance. With change, a
given in most industries, it is only by developing a thorough
understanding of change-related phenomena that future in-
vestigators can be in a position to offer guidance to all in-
volved in change programs.
REFERENCES
Ackoff, R.A. (1974), Redesigning the Future: A Systems Approach
to Societal Problems, New York: Wiley.
Anderson, R.E. (1996), “Personal Selling and Sales Management
in the New Millennium,” Journal of Personal Selling and
Sales Management, 16, 4 (Fall), 17–32.
Argyris, C., R. Putnam, and D. Smith (1991), Action Science,
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Armenakis, A.A., S.G. Harris, and K.W. Mossholder (1993),
“Creating Readiness for Organizational Change,” Human
Relations, 46, 6, 681–703.
Armstrong, J. Scott, and Terry S. Overton (1977), “Estimating
Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys,” Journal of Marketing
Research, 14, 3 (August), 396–402.
Balaji, Krishnan, Richard G. Netemeyer, and James S. Boles
(2002), “Self-Efficacy, Competitiveness and Effort as Ante-

cedents of Salesperson Performance,” Journal of Personal
Selling and Sales Management, 22, 4 (Fall), 285–296.
Baron, Reuben M., and David A. Kenny (1986), “The Modera-
tor-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological
Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Consider-
ations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (De-
cember), 1173–1182.
Behrman, Douglas N., and William D. Perreault, Jr. (1982),
“Measuring the Performance of Industrial Salespeople,” Jour-
nal of Business Research, 10, 3 (September), 335–370.
———, and ——— (1984), “A Role Stress Model of the Per-
formance and Satisfaction of Industrial Salespersons,” Jour-
nal of Marketing, 48, 4 (Fall), 9–21.
Bennett, Linda, Jennifer Genevieve, Jen Condodina, Barbara
Ettore, Louisa Wah, Mike Johnson, Alejandro Saggese, and
Kye Cousins (1998), “Transforming Human Resources
Around the World,” Management Review, 87, 7 (July–Au-
gust), 48–52.
Biggart, N.W. (1977), “The Creative Destructive Process of
Organizational Change: The Case of the Post Office,” Ad-
ministrative Science Quarterly, 22, 3 (September), 410–425.
Blanchard, K. (1992), “Seven Dynamics of Change,” Executive
Excellence, 9, 6 (June), 5–6.
Cascio, W.F. (1995), “Whither Industrial and Organizational
Psychology in a Changing World of Work?” American Psy-
chologist, 50, 11 (November), 928–939.
Chonko, Lawrence B., John F. Tanner, and William A. Weeks
(1993), “Sales Training: Status and Needs,” Journal of Per-
sonal Selling and Sales Management, 13, 4 (Fall), 81–86.
———, Eli Jones, James A. Roberts, and Alan J. Dubinsky
(2002), “The Role of Environmental Turbulence, Readi-
ness for Change, and Salesperson Learning in the Success
of Sales Force Change,” Journal of Personal Selling and Sales
Management, 22, 4 (Fall), 227–245.
———, Terry W. Loe, James A. Roberts, and John F. Tanner
(2000), “Sales Performance: Timing of Measurement and
Type of Measurement Make a Difference,” Journal of Per-
sonal Selling and Sales Management, 20, 1 (Winter), 23–36.
Churchill, Gilbert A., Jr., Neil M. Ford, and Orville C. Walker, Jr.
(1974), “Measuring the Job Satisfaction of Industrial Sales-
men,” Journal of Marketing Research, 11, 3 (August), 254–260.
———, ———, Steven W. Hartley, and Orville C. Walker, Jr.
(1985), “The Determinants of Salesperson Performance: A
Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 2 (May),
103–118.
Crnkovisch, P., and W. Hesterly (1996), “Transformational Lead-
ership and Strategic Discretion: An Empirical Test of a
Framework for Predicting New Product Development Pro-
gram Success,” in Proceedings of the 1996 Annual Confer-
ence on Product Development and Management Association,
K. Kahn, ed., Chicago: Product Development and Man-
agement Association, 19–30.
Cohen, W.M., and D.A. Levinthal (1990), “Absorptive Capac-
ity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation,” Admin-
istrative Science Quarterly, 35, 1 (March), 128–152.
Colletti, J.A., and Lawrence B. Chonko (1997), “Change Man-
agement Initiatives: Moving Sales Organizations from Ob-
Winter 2004 15
solescence to High Performance,” Journal of Personal Sell-
ing and Sales Management, 17, 2 (Spring), 1–30.
Comer, James M., Gregory A. Rich, William H. Bommer, Scott
B. MacKenzie, Philip M. Podsakoff, and Jonathan L.
Johnson (1999), “Apples and Apples or Apples and Oranges?
A Meta-Analysis of Objective and Subjective Measures of
Salesperson Performance,” Journal of Personal Selling and
Sales Management, 19, 4 (Fall), 41–53.
Cravens, David W., Raymond W. LaForge, Gregory M. Pickett,
and Clifford E. Young (1993), “Incorporating a Quality
Improvement Perspective into Measures of Sales Perfor-
mance,” Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management,
13, 1 (Winter), 1–14.
Cronin, J.J., and S.A. Taylor (1992), “Measuring Service Qual-
ity: A Reexamination and Extension,” Journal of Market-
ing, 56, 3 (July), 55–68.
Daley, D.M. (1991), “Management Practices and the Uninvolved
Manager: The Effect of Supervisory Attitudes on Percep-
tions of Organizational Trust and Change Orientation,”
Public Personnel Management, 20, 1 (Spring), 101–118.
D’Aveni, R.A. (1994), Hypercompetition: Managing the Dynam-
ics of Strategic Maneuvering, New York: Free Press.
Denton, K. (1996), “9 Ways to Create an Atmosphere of
Change,” Human Resource Magazine, 41, 10 (October),
76–81.
Deshpande, Rohit, and Frederick E. Webster, Jr. (1989), “Orga-
nizational Culture and Marketing: Defining the Research
Agenda,” Journal of Marketing, 53, 1 (January), 3–15.
Eagle, M. (1999), “Why Don’t People Change? A Psychoanalytic
Perspective,” Journal of Psychological Integration, 9 (1), 3–32.
Eby, L.T., D. Adams, J.E.A. Russell, and S.H. Gaby (2000), “Per-
ceptions of Organizational Readiness for Change: Factors
Related to Employees’ Reactions to the Implementation of
Team-Based Selling,” Human Relations, 53, 3 (March),
419–422.
Evans, Edward A. (2001), “Executive Commentary,” Academy of
Management Executive, 15, 4 (November), 94–95.
Farrand, M.D. (1998), “A Comment on “Change Management
Initiatives: Moving Sales Organizations from Obsolescence
to High Performance,” Journal of Personal Selling and Sales
Management, 18, 1 (Winter), 49–52.
Frazier, G.L., and R.C. Rody (1991), “The Use of Influence Strat-
egies in Interfirm Relationships in Industrial Product Chan-
nels,” Journal of Marketing, 55, 1 (January), 52–69.
Galpin, T., and D.E. Robinson (1997), “Raising the Bar of
Change Management,” Human Resource Professional, 10, 2
(March–April), 15–19.
Geisler, E. (1996), “Cleaning Up After Reengineering,” Business
Horizons, 31, 5 (September–October), 71–78.
Gordon, S.S., W.H. Stewart, Jr., R. Sweo, and W.A. Luker (2000),
“Convergence Versus Strategic Reorientation: The Anteced-
ents of Fast-Paced Organizational Change,” Journal of Man-
agement, 26 (5), 911–945.
Harari, Oren (1997), “Ten Reasons TQM Doesn’t Work,” Man-
agement Review, 29, 1 (January), 38–44.
——— (1999), “Why Do Leaders Avoid Change?” Management
Review, 88, 3 (March), 35–39.
16 Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management
Hardin, E. (1967), “Job Satisfaction and the Desire for Change,”
Journal of Applied Psychology, 51 (2), 20–27.
Howard, A., ed. (1995), The Changing Nature of Work, San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass.
HR Focus (2001), “Focus Resources Now on Retained Employ-
ees,” 78, 10 (October), 1–5.
Hurley, R.F. (1998), “Managing Change: An Ethnographic Ap-
proach to Developing Research Propositions and Under-
standing Change in Sales Organizations,” Journal of Personal
Selling and Sales Management, 18, 3 (Summer), 57–71.
Hutchison S. (2001), “Communicating in Times of Change,”
Strategic Communications Management, 5, 2 (February–
March), 28–32.
Kets de Vries, Manfred F.R., and Katharina Balazs (1999), “Trans-
forming the Mind-Set of the Organization,” Administra-
tion & Society, 30, 6 (January), 640–676.
Kilman, R.H. (1984), Beyond the Quick Fix, San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Law, C., and R.W. Woodman (1995), “Understanding Organi-
zational Change: A Schematic Perspective,” Academy of
Management, 38, 2 (April), 537–554.
Lawson, Emily (2003), “The Psychology of Change Manage-
ment,” McKinsey Quarterly, 2 (June 26), 1–8 (available at
www.mckinseyquarterly.com).
Lewin, K. (1951), Field Theory in Social Science, New York: Harper
and Row.
McNabb, David E., and F. Thomas Sepic (1995), “Culture, Cli-
mate and Total Quality Management: Measuring Readi-
ness for Change,” Public Production & Management Review,
18, 4 (Summer), 369–385.
Miles, R.H. (1997), Corporate Comeback. The Story of Renewal
and Transformation at National Semiconductor, San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moncrief, W.C., III (1986), “Selling Activity and Sales Position
Taxonomies for Industrial Salesforces,” Journal of Market-
ing Research, 23, 3 (August), 261–70.
Pettigrew, A.M. (1990), “Organizational Climate: Two Con-
structs in Search of a Role,” in Organizational Climate and
Culture, B. Schneider, ed., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
413–434.
Podsakoff, Phillip, Scott Mackenzie, and William Bommer
(1996), “Transformational Leader Behaviors and Substitutes
for Leadership as Determinants of Employee Satisfaction
Commitment, Trust and Organizational Citizenship Behav-
iors,” Journal of Management, 22 (2), 259–298.
Rusaw, A.C. (2000), “Uncovering Training Resistance: A Criti-
cal Theory Perspective,” Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 13 (3), 249–263.
Russ, Frederick A., Kevin M. McNeilly, and James M. Comer
(1996), “Leadership, Decision Making and Performance of
Sales Managers: A Multi-Level Approach,” Journal of Per-
sonal Selling and Sales Management, 16, 3 (Summer), 1–15.
Schein, E.A. (1992), Organizational Culture and Leadership, 2d
edition, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schneider, Benjamin, and J. Rentsch (1988), “Managing Cli-
mates and Cultures: A Futures Perspective,” in Futures of
Organizations, J. Hage, ed., Lexington, MA: Lexington
Books, 181–200.
Senge, Peter M., and Katrin H. Kaeufer (2000), “Creating
Change,” Executive Excellence, 17, 10 (October), 4–5.
Spreitzer, G.M. (1996), “Social Structural Characteristics of Psy-
chological Empowerment,” Academy of Management, 39, 2
(April), 483–504.
Sujan, Harish, Barton A. Weitz, and Normally Kumar (1994),
“Learning Orientation, Working Smart, and Effective Sell-
ing,” Journal of Marketing, 58, 3 (July), 39–52.
———, ———, and Mita Sujan (1988), “Increasing Sales Pro-
ductivity by Getting Salespeople to Work Smarter,” Journal
of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 8, 2 (August),
9–19.
Tapsell, S., and G. Law (1998), “The Challenge of Change and
Fear of the Unknown,” New Zealand Management, 45, 7
(August), 60–66.
Tetenbaum, T.J. (1998), “Shifting Paradigms: From Newton to
Chaos,” Organization Dynamics, 26 (4), 21–32.
Thomas, K.W., and B.A. Velthouse (1990), “Cognitive Elements
of Empowerment: An Interpretive Model of Intrinsic Task
Motivation” Academy of Management Review, 15, 4 (Octo-
ber), 666–681.
Tomer, J.F. (2001), “Addictions Are Not Rational: A Socio-Eco-
nomic Model of Addictive Behavior,” Journal of Sociology-
Economics, 30 (3), 243–261.
Trumbo, D.A. (1961), “Industrial and Group Correlates of Atti-
tudes Toward Work Related Change,” Journal of Applied
Psychology, 45 (5), 338–344.
Tyagi, P.K. (1985), “Relative Importance of Key Job Dimen-
sions and Leadership Behaviors in Motivating Salesperson
Work Performance,” Journal of Marketing, 49, 3 (Summer),
76–86.
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, 2 (May), 156–168.
Weeks, William A., and Jacques Nantel (1992), “Corporate Codes
of Ethics and Sales Force Behavior: A Case Study,” Journal
of Business Ethics, 11, 11 (October), 753–760.
———, and Carl G. Stevens (1997), “National Account Manage-
ment Sales Training and Directions for Improvement,” Indus-
trial Marketing Management, 26, 5 (September), 423–431.
Wheatley, M. (1992), Leadership and the New Science: Learning
About Organization from an Orderly Universe, San Francisco:
Barrett-Koehler.
 Winter 2004 17

APPENDIX
STUDY SCALE ITEMS

Organizational Readiness
RDY1. We fail to anticipate employee resistance to change.
RDY2. We fail to plan for employee resistance to change.
RDY3. It is difficult to gain cross-functional cooperation when my company implements change.
RDY4. We have rigid hierarchical structures that prevent us from implementing change.

Job Performance
PERF1. Contributing to your company’s acquiring a good market share.
PERF2. Selling high profit-margin products.
PERF3. Generating a high level of dollar sales.
PERF4. Quickly generating sales of new company products.
PERF5. Identifying major accounts in your territory and selling to them.
PERF6. Exceeding sales targets.
PERF7. Assisting your sales supervisor meet his or her goals.

Individual Fear of Change

FEAR1. I am fearful of change.
FEAR2. I worry about changes taking place at work.
FEAR3. I feel anxious when I hear about impending changes at work.
FEAR4. I get nervous when I have to change the way I do things at work.
FEAR5. I am skeptical of change when it comes to my work.