The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0309-0566.htm

Inside sales
The business-to-business inside force
sales force: roles, configurations
and research agenda
Stefan Sleep 1025
School of Business, Georgia Gwinnett College, Lawrenceville, Georgia, USA
Received 21 June 2018
Andrea L. Dixon Revised 1 December 2018
23 May 2019
Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA 18 October 2019
16 January 2020
Accepted 28 January 2020
Thomas DeCarlo
Collat School of Business, University of Alabama at Birmingham,
Birmingham, Alabama, USA, and
Son K. Lam
Terry College of Business, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA

Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to explore the changing nature of the inside sales role and the individual
capabilities required for success. Additionally, it examines the influence of organizational structure on inside
sales force capabilities. Although business-to-business firms are investing heavily in inside sales forces,
academic research lags behind this evolution.
Design/methodology/approach – Using a two-study qualitative approach, the authors examine
contemporary inside sales forces’ responsibilities and operational configurations. Study 1 uses a cross-
industry sample of sales leaders and professionals to examine roles and responsibilities. Study 2 used the
second sample of sales leaders and professionals to explore the impact of various organizational
configurations.
Findings – The study identifies important differences between inside and outside salespeople in
terms of job demands and resources; inside salespeople’s greater reliance on sales technology and
analytics than outside counterparts; and existing control systems’ failure to provide resources and
incentives to match with inside salespeople’s increasing strategic benefits and job demands. The
study also explores four distinct inside–outside configurations. The differences among these
configurations help to explain the distinct benefits and costs of each configuration regarding the
company, customer and intra sales force processes, which, in turn, determine inside salespeople’s
strategic benefits and job demands.
Research limitations/implications – The authors discuss the theoretical implications of these
findings for research on the evolving roles and capabilities of the inside sales force; antecedents and
consequences of firms’ choice of inside–outside sales force configurations; and the impact of technology
and the inside sales force. They propose a research agenda that includes a series of specific future research
questions.
Practical implications – This study informs managers of the unique role of the inside sales force and
how it differs from their outside counterpart. The results inform managers of the issues inherent to various
inside sales configurations, helping them determine, which configuration best addresses their customers’
needs. European Journal of Marketing
Vol. 54 No. 5, 2020
pp. 1025-1060
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0309-0566
Research funding provided by the Frank and Floy Smith Holloway Fund at Baylor University. DOI 10.1108/EJM-06-2018-0416
EJM Originality/value – This research provides a detailed, updated account of the differences between inside
and outside sales forces and the benefits/costs of major inside–outside sales force configurations. Drawing
54,5 from job demands-resources, organizational structure and strategy-context fit theories, the authors develop
research propositions about the underlying structural differences of inside-outside sales force configurations;
how these differences drive the inside sales force’s increasing strategic benefits and job demands; and
organizational choice of inside sales force configurations. A research agenda is then presented.
Keywords Job demands-resources theory, Inside sales force, Sales force configuration
1026 Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Initiating a buyer–seller relationship today seldom mirrors Hollywood depictions such as
those in Wall Street (1987) or Mad Men (2007-2015), in which a salesperson meets a buyer
over an introductory extended lunch. Today’s business-to-business (B2B) relationships may
also be launched and sustained through e-mail, telephone, social media or virtual meetings
(Insidesales.com, 2016). In fact, the need for face-to-face interactions now occurs much later
in the B2B sales process (Mantrala and Albers, 2012), if the buyer and salespeople meet in
person at all. As salesperson–customer interactions become more digitally intermediated,
the ability to maintain a strategic advantage by generating “superior market sensing,
customer linking and channel-bonding capabilities” (Day, 1994, p. 41) leads to an increased
reliance on the inside sales force (Zoltners et al., 2013).
According to Krogue (2013), inside sales are professional sales conducted remotely, while
outside sales are accomplished primarily face-to-face. The inside sales toolkit includes
telephone, video conferencing, Web chats, text and e-mail. A key differentiating factor
between inside sales and telemarketers in call centers is that telemarketers typically have
highly script-based roles and are limited to a selling-only function (i.e. asking for the order
after a brief product discussion) with no expectation of relationship development.
Conversely, inside sales personnel engage with customers and prospects in highly adaptive
exchanges and have additional responsibilities not typically found in a telemarketing role,
such as post-sales service, customer relationship management (CRM) and relationship-
building. The rapid transformation of the inside sales role makes it an important weapon in
the chief sales officer’s arsenal for B2B selling (Krogue, 2017).
Financially, research estimates that firms achieve a 40-90 per cent cost reduction from
using inside rather than outside salespeople (Zoltners et al., 2013). Not surprisingly, the
inside sales industry is experiencing an average growth rate of 7.5 per cent, compared with
0.5 per cent for outside sales in non-retail positions (Oldroyd, 2013). Thus, insights gleaned
from the changing nature of the inside sales role and the individual capabilities required for
success are important for both academics and practitioners.
Despite the increasing focus on the inside sales force as strategically important in practice,
recent academic research on the topic is scarce. Early work centered on tactical differences
between the inside and outside sales roles (Marshall and Vredenburg, 1991; Narus and
Anderson, 1986); however, most of this research pre-dates 2000 when internet-driven
technology significantly altered the sales landscape by reducing salesperson information
asymmetry and increasing digital connectivity. Surprisingly, research has yet to explore the
possibility that new inside salesperson capabilities are necessary to successfully build
relationships with more knowledgeable and connected customers. In addition, although several
studies identify important organizational factors affecting both inside and outside salespeople,
findings have been rather mixed (Gessner and Scott, 2009; Rapp et al., 2012; Rutherford et al.,
2014). Furthermore, no studies investigate how organizational structure influences sales force
capabilities. This is a significant omission, given the well-accepted notion that appropriately
structuring an organization around its capabilities leads to greater firm performance (Day, Inside sales
1994; Lee et al., 2015). Thus, such an investigation would not only extend sales organization force
structure theory by showing how sales force structure can help reconcile mixed findings in
prior research on inside–outside sales forces, but also provide managers with insights for
optimizing their inside sales force capabilities.
The evolution of the selling context and customer–supplier interactions in the past three
decades prompts the need to systematically examine the contemporary inside sales force.
Accordingly, our core research questions are as follows: 1027
RQ1. What are the differences between the roles and capabilities of today’s inside sales
force and those of the outside sales force, and what is the impact of technology?
RQ2. How can firms configure their inside–outside sales organizations, and what are
the strategic and operational benefits and costs?
Theoretically, a systematic elaboration on these questions will shed light on the
characteristics of the new breed of inside sales forces and provide important implications for
emerging research on inside sales. For practitioners, this understanding has implications for
how managers select, train, develop and retain inside salespeople.
Our study draws from two theoretical perspectives, corresponding to two levels of
analysis. First, we rely on micro-level job demands–resources (JD-R) theory (Bakker and
Demerouti, 2007) to identify inside salespeople’s job demands and resources associated with
their new role in the current selling context. Here, job demands refer to the physical,
psychological, social or organizational aspects of the jobs that require sustained physical
and/or psychological effort, and therefore, are associated with certain physiological and/or
psychological costs (Demerouti et al., 2001). Job demands can be complex, incorporating
several dimensions. For example, role overload is a type of job demand that is psychological
(personally experienced) and organizational (codified in a role) in perspective. By contrast, job
resources refer to the physical, psychological, social or organizational aspects of the job that
are functional in achieving work goals, reducing job demands and their associated costs, and
stimulating personal growth, learning and development (Bakker and Demerouti, 2007).
Second, we draw from the structure–process–outcome perspective (Tolbert and Hall, 2009) to
unpack the differences among various inside–outside sales force configurations. In turn,
these differences influence within-firm and customer-related processes and explain variation
in inside salespeople’s job demands and resources.
We began by conducting a pilot study to assess the substantive importance of our primary
investigation – whether B2B customers perceive the growing importance of the internal sales
force to their operations (Zoltners et al., 2013). Next, we reviewed extant academic research and
the practitioner press to develop an initial perspective on the current environment in which the
inside sales force operates. We, then, conducted Study 1, involving in-depth interviews with
sales managers and salespeople, to investigate how technology and the changing sales
environment have resulted in a new generation of inside salespeople and how they differ from
the outside sales force along multiple dimensions. The findings show that there is
heterogeneity in inside salespeople’s increasing strategic benefits and job demands among
firms. In Study 2, we examined how inside–outside sales force configurations have differential
benefits and costs that determine the between-firm heterogeneity in inside sales force’s
strategic value and job demands uncovered in Study 1. Based on the findings from the two
studies and prior research on organizational structure and team design, we developed a series
of research questions around inside sales capabilities, the firm’s choice of inside sales
organization, and the impact of technology to promote future research in this area.
EJM This research builds on rekindled interests in how the organizational structure influences
54,5 marketing activities (Lee et al., 2015) and contributes to extant literature in at least three
ways. First, we identify and articulate a contemporary account of important changes of the
inside sales role and delineate differences between inside and outside sales roles and
capabilities along eight dimensions as follows:
(1) job characteristics;
1028 (2) technical knowledge;
(3) selling skills;
(4) interpersonal skills;
(5) aptitude;
(6) organizational skills;
(7) sales force control; and
(8) salesperson characteristics.

Our comparison extends prior research on the two sales forces and illuminates the uniqueness of
inside versus outside salespeople, who represent the primary focus of prior sales research.
Second, we identify the benefits and costs associated with several inside–outside sales force
configurations. This understanding not only provides scholars with a useful framework for
research on sales force strategy and organization but also underscores the need for future
research to account for the differences in inside–outside configurations and the specific role of
inside salespeople in various contexts. Third, our study offers new research opportunities and
challenges. We do so by developing specific research questions for future investigation.

Literature review
Despite the increasing focus on the inside sales force as strategically important in practice,
academic research on the topic is limited. Given our research questions, we reviewed the
academic research in three sales areas as follows:
(1) internal sales roles;
(2) sales organizational configurations; and
(3) the impact of technology on sales roles (see Figure 1 and Appendix).

First, early work centered on the evolving role of sales positions that operated within the
firm. The initial focus was on telemarketing and the introduction of the inside sales role
(Marshall and Vredenburg, 1991; Moncrief et al., 1989; Narus and Anderson, 1986). While
these studies offer important insights, they predate 2000, when the internet significantly
altered the sales landscape.
The second area explores various factors affecting the configuration of sales organizations
within the firm (Gessner and Scott, 2009; Rutherford et al., 2014). These studies largely examine
sales support systems (Arndt and Harkins, 2013; Moncrief et al., 1986) and the challenges
associated with intra-firm relationships (Piercy and Lane, 2003; Speakman and Ryals, 2012).
While these studies identify important organizational factors affecting both inside and outside
salespeople, we found only one study investigating how organizational structure influences
inside sales force capabilities. Thaichon et al. (2018) make an important contribution by
providing an overview of hybrid sales structures but, compared with the current study, we take
a much broader, more strategic organizational perspective.
 Key Themes in
Prior research
on Inside Sales
Sales Organizational
Configurations
• The sales organization takes on a more
strategic, customer management approach
(Moncrief et al., 1986; Piercy and Lane,
2003)
• Within the firm, sales teams experience
both conflict (Speakman and Ryals, 2012)
and organizational support (e.g.,
Rutherford et al., 2014) which impacts
performance
Internal
Sales Roles
• The telephone evolves from an order
taking to a selling tool (e.g., Zibrun,
1987; Marshall and Vredenburg,
1988; Marshall and Vredenburg,
1991)
• Inside sales people have distinct roles
and customer impact (e.g., Boyle,
1996; Darmon, 1998)
Inside sales
Impact of Technology
on Sales Roles force
• Technology has a positive impact on
communication, effectiveness, and
relationship building (e.g., MacDonald and
Smith, 2004; Johnson and Bharadwaj, 2005;
Romàn and Rodrìguez, 2015)
• Technology is replacing face-to-face
interactions (e.g., Ferrell et al., 2010; Mantrala
and Albers, 2012; Marshall et al., 2012)
• Use of mobile technology and social media
influences sales roles (e.g., Jussila et al., 2014;
1029
Romàn et al., 2018)

• What are the organizational configurations

adopted for inside and outside sales?
Research • How does the organizational configuration
Gaps impact customer relationships?
• How does the organizational configuration
impact the relationship between sales
organizations (cooperation and conflict)?
• How has the internal sales role changed
since initial research conducted in the
1980s and 1990s?
• As inside sales takes on more
responsibility, how is it distinct from
outside sales?
• How has the internet, and other recent
technology, affected the evolution of inside sales
roles?
• Do inside sales and outside sales use technology
differently?

• Delineate the benefits and costs of

• Reexamine the roles and capabilities Figure 1.
necessary for the inside sales force to
Research
organizational structures of the inside sales
force for the firm, customers, and the
communicate with customers in
• Examine how technology impacts sales roles
Prior research,
Objectives today’s technology-driven sales
inside sales force.
• Examine the changing relationship of the
environment.
and impacts the move to inside sales
research gaps and
• Examine how inside sales capabilities
inside sales force with both the outside
sales force and customers.
evolve and differ from outside sales research objectives
capabilities.

The third area of sales research examines how technology affects the different sales roles
(Mantrala and Albers, 2012; Rapp et al., 2012; Román and Rodríguez, 2015) and the use of
technology in building customer relationships by the outside sales force. Research has yet to
explore the possibility that new inside salesperson capabilities may be necessary to
successfully build relationships with more knowledgeable and connected customers.

The increasing importance of inside sales forces

Drivers of the rise of the inside sales force
Firms are increasingly shifting their resources to developing inside sales organizations
(Gessner and Scott, 2009; Martin, 2013). For example, research in the technology industry
indicates that among large companies, nearly 40 per cent plan to shift resources from
outside to inside sales (Albrecht et al., 2014). Practitioners and academics agree that this
shift is because of changes in three main areas as follows:
(1) within the company;
(2) in customer relationships; and
(3) across the competitive landscape.

First, call centers, inside sales and outside sales have historically had distinct roles in
companies. The original call centers were the problem-takers, inside salespeople were the
order-takers and outside salespeople were the order-generators (Marshall and Vredenburg,
1988; Narus and Anderson, 1986). This is no longer the case, however. New methods of
communication (e.g. virtual meeting software and social media) make it easier and less
costly for the inside sales force to effectively interact with customers and prospects virtually
and to conduct many activities previously reserved for face-to-face meetings (Ferrell et al.,
2010; Marshall et al., 2012; Rutherford et al., 2014). Furthermore, an inside sales force enables
firms to effectively manage more customer segments. For example, firms are transitioning
the responsibilities of small and medium-sized accounts (previously deemed “marginal”) to
the inside sales force, which provides regular communications and service support and
enhances long-term value (Gessner and Scott, 2009; Martin, 2013).
EJM Second, changes in customer behavior and customer–salesperson interactions have also
54,5 increased the strategic importance of the inside sales force. B2B customers are using various
technology-based channels and platforms to acquire information that was typically
provided by salespeople in the past (Johnson and Bharadwaj, 2005). As a result, the B2B
sales process is becoming more buyer-driven (Mantrala and Albers, 2012) and virtual
(Marshall et al., 2012). Moreover, evidence suggests that where a salesperson works (i.e.
1030 inside or outside the firm) has no significant effect on customer orientation (Rapp et al.,
2012). One study even reports that 37 per cent of customers have decreased their use of face-
to-face meetings and trade shows because of the availability of online resources (Mantrala
and Albers, 2012).
Third, intensified competition has compelled firms to invest in the inside sales force as a
cost-efficient CRM capability. In addition to fielding customers’ questions and offering a
product or technical assistance, the inside sales force is uniquely positioned to turn customer
contact moments into upselling and cross-selling opportunities (e.g. value-added services).

Pilot study
Before undertaking our research program, we, first, conducted a pilot study to gain a
B2B customer perspective on the substantive importance of the inside sales force in the
current business environment. The participating company is a national steel
distributor. Given our goal of investigating the changing nature of the inside sales role
in the B2B channel, the participating company, though a convenience sample, is a good
fit for a pilot test because it serves customers across a wide variety of different B2B
industries. We invited 3,087 customers across eight Southeast regions of the USA to
participate in a web-based survey to determine the relative importance of five pre-
determined sales and services dimensions. The e-mail consisted of an invitation to
participate in the study with a link at the bottom that took respondents directly to the
Web survey. We received 499 responses (approximately 16.2 per cent response rate).
Respondents rank-ordered (1 = most important and 5 = least important to their
operations) a randomized list of the following sales and service attributes:

billing timeliness and accuracy;

on-time product delivery;

product quality;

the inside sales force; and

their outside salesperson.

The results show that respondents ranked the inside sales force as significantly more
important (M = 2.07) than the outside salesperson (M = 3.54). The other results were product
quality (M = 1.23), on-time delivery (M = 1.53) and billing timeliness and accuracy
(M = 3.03). These rankings did not change across the respondent title, share of wallet or
number of years as a customer[1]. While we recognize the study’s limitations (e.g. single firm
and commodity industry), these results provide initial support for the increasing strategic
importance of the inside sales force.
Both academic research and our pilot study confirm that the inside sales force’s strategic
value and job demands have evolved. However, extant literature has yet to codify how these
changes have influenced the unique roles and structures of the contemporary inside sales
force. Thus, there is a need for a systematic re-examination of:

the roles and capabilities of today’s inside sales force relative to those of the outside Inside sales
sales force; and force

how firms configure their inside–outside sales organizations, along with the
strategic and operational benefits and costs.
Overview of studies
To better understand the evolving roles and structures of the inside sales force, we adopted a
qualitative approach using a series of interviews with multiple sales professionals in various 1031
roles. This approach enables us to develop a theory based on the perspectives of the respondents
who live through the experience and are involved in the actual process. As Figure 2 illustrates, we
conducted two in-depth interview studies. Study 1 aims to identify key differences between inside
and outside sales roles, including the nature of the job characteristics, knowledge/skills/
capabilities, candidate profiles and development opportunities and the dominant sales force
control systems used for each role. Study 2 explores various configurations that firms use to
organize their inside sales force to better understand how firm structure may affect their role and
the coordination between the inside and outside sales force. Our goal is to pinpoint the benefits
and costs, both strategic (i.e. for the firm and its customers) and operational (i.e. for inside and
outside salespeople), of major sales force configurational archetypes.

Method
For each study, we created a protocol to guide the interview process and ensure consistent
coverage of relevant topics during the interviews. We updated the protocol after each interview
to remove saturated themes and to delve deeper into emerging themes. To ensure that we
accurately captured the information respondents provided, we recorded all interviews, and a
professional transcriptionist transcribed them verbatim. The method’s iterative nature required
ongoing data analysis to inform future interviews and observations. Constant comparison of
the collected data resulted in an evolution of the research questions, concepts and linkages
(Corbin and Strauss, 1990). Our purposive sampling procedure continued until we reached a
saturation point in terms of gaining new information (Eisenhardt, 1989).

Why are there

Study 2
Differences in Benefits and Costs of Configurations
Qualitative Inquiries

many
Study 1 differences?
Differential Outcomes
Sequence of

Differences between Differences in

among Configurations
How do Company and Customer Processes
Inside and Outside Salespeople • Inside salespeople:
inside salespeople differ • Customer acquisition and retention
from outside ones? strategic importance, job
• Job characteristics effectiveness
demands, role stress,
Pilot Study • Knowledge and skills required turnover, development
Differences in
• Development opportunities • Company outcomes: Sales
Intra-Sales Force Processes
• Sales force control process leanness/efficiency
Customer Surveys • Inside-outside sales force
• Profile • Customer satisfaction
relationship quality

Pilot Study Study 1 – Key findings Study 2 – Key findings

Key findings • Inside salespeople’s task significance and complexity • Inside-outside configurations have
and technical requirements have increased and differential benefits and costs and differ
Findings

• Inside salespeople face become similar to those of outside salespeople  along several structural dimensions.
Key

new challenges
• Inside salespeople can
be more important than
outside salespeople
Higher Job Demands than Job Resources • Each configuration generates
• Firms have not significantly changed the way they differential JDs-Rs among inside
control their inside sales forces. salespeople, especially customer
• JD-R of Inside Salespeople are determined mainly by responsibilities and the relationship
inside-outside configurations with outside salespeople

Future Research Theme 1

Future Research

Underlying Structural Differences of Inside-Outside Sales Force Configurations

Identification

JD-R of Inside Salespeople and Their Behavior

Figure 2.
Future Research Theme 3 Future Research Theme 2
Studies 1 and 2
The Influence of New Technologies
on Inside Sales Force
Firm’s Strategic Choice of
Inside-Outside Sales Force Configurations
overview
EJM Sampling
54,5 Following marketing research that explores rather than describes phenomena, we used a
theoretical sampling technique for identifying respondents who could shed more light on the
roles and organizational designs of the inside sales organization as the data coding process
evolved (Malshe and Sohi, 2009; Tuli et al., 2007). We recruited respondents to represent a
variety of industries (technology, manufacturing, business services, insurance and financial
1032 services and construction) and roles (sales representative, sales manager, sales director and vice
president of sales), leveraging our database of more than 5,500 US-based company contacts.
Our goal was to purposively select prospective respondents to reflect a variety of firm
sizes, industry settings, product/service contexts, informant job roles, informant job levels
and geographic locations in the USA. As such, it was necessary to categorize the contacts in
our database by industry, firm size, corporate headquarters location, informant location, etc.
We, then, identified prospective respondents based on appropriate roles and job level. The
recruiter then contacted potential respondents in each category grouping to arrange an
interview with one of the principal investigators. This sampling approach resulted in
interviews with sales representatives and executives across a variety of firms, sizes, roles
and locations (Malshe and Sohi, 2009). Table I describes the informants across both studies.
We conducted the interviews during Q3/4 2016 and Q1 2017.

Study 1 protocol and script

To develop an interview script for Study 1, we, first, conducted a literature review to identify
the elements most critical to sales performance, including job characteristics, selling skills,
aptitude and personality (Churchill et al., 1985; Hackman and Lawler, 1971; Panagopoulos
et al., 2017; Plouffe and Barclay, 2007; Weitz et al., 1986). We also drew from recent studies
on sales technology and social selling (Agnihotri et al., 2016; Andzulis et al., 2012) and
studies addressing sales force control systems (Oliver and Anderson, 1994). Table II reports
the relevant studies that informed our selection of these focal variables for Study 1, their

Criteria Study 1 Study 2a

Industry
Technology 29 1
Manufacturing 2 2
Services 6 4
Finance and insurance 1 0
Wholesale trade 0 7
Construction 1 0
Position
Sales representative/specialist 9 2
Sales manager 10 10
Sales director 8 0
Vice president/executive 10 2
Other 2 0
Gender
Male 27 10
Female 12 4
Table I.
Informant summary Note: aStudy 2 included a different set of informants than Study 1
Second-order
dimensions First-order dimensions Definition/explanation JD or JRb

Job characteristics Skill varietya The key attributes of the job (Hackman and Lawler, 1971) JD/JR
Task identity
Task significance
Task autonomy
Feedback
Technical Sales-related knowledge “Knowledge base that enables [salespeople] to size up sales situations, classify prospects, and select JD
knowledge appropriate sales strategies for clients” (Leong et al., 1989, p. 164)
Social media use A salesperson’s utilization and integration of social media technology to perform his or her job (Agnihotri JD
et al., 2016)
Analytics Layering analytics seamlessly on top of linked data on customers, sales activities and salespeople, to JD/JR
deliver the right decision assistance to the right salespeople and customers at the right time (Zoltners
et al., 2015)
Selling skills Solution selling involvement The set of salesperson-related activities that enact the relational processes inherent in customer solutions JD/JR
(Panagopoulos et al., 2017)
Interpersonal skills Adaptiveness “The altering of sales behaviors during a customer interaction or across customer interactions based on JD
perceived information about the nature of the selling situation” (Weitz et al., 1986, p. 175)
Cognitive empathy Guiding the buyer toward a choice, while understanding how the buyer views its situation (McBane, 1995) JD
Aptitude Cognitive ability Including measures of the general factors of mental ability, verbal ability and quantitative ability (Matsuo JD
and Kusumi, 2002; Vinchur et al., 1998)
Emotional intelligence The ability to perceive emotions in the self and in others, use emotions to facilitate performance, JD
understand emotions and regulate emotions (Mayer and Salovey, 1997)
Organizational Teamwork and salesperson A set of salesperson behaviors used to acquire or align needed resources, processes and other key JD
skills navigation intraorganizational inputs that can enhance the salesperson’s performance (Plouffe and Barclay, 2007)
Correspond to the “dealing with others” dimension in Hackman and Lawler’s (1971) job characteristics
Sales force control Control strategy (behavior vs An organization’s set of procedures for monitoring, directing, evaluating and compensating its employees JR
systems outcome-based) (Oliver and Anderson, 1994)
Compensation plan
Salesperson Salesperson profile “Expressed in terms of easily observable personal characteristics or in terms of easily measurable JD
characteristics personality traits” (Darmon, 1982, p. 14)
Extraversion Being sociable and outgoing (Stewart, 1996) JD

Notes: aSkill variety – using different skills that may be important to the employee; task autonomy – feeling personal responsibility for work; task identity –
completing a whole piece of work that has produced something of consequence; task significance – the degree to which the job has a substantial impact on the
lives or work of other people; feedback – receiving input about what is accomplished; bJD = job demands and JR = job resources. Some categories are both JD and
JR

Definitions of focal
Inside sales

variables in Study 1
1033
force

Table II.
EJM definitions, and a classification of these variables based on JD-R theory (Bakker and
54,5 Demerouti, 2007).
In the conversations with key informants, we asked respondents to identify the
differences, if any, for inside and outside salespeople in areas such as job characteristics,
selling approaches and skillsets, interpersonal and organizational skill sets, salesperson
characteristics and aptitude, technical knowledge and usage, organizational skills and
1034 salesforce control systems. Our interview script included open-ended questions to allow
respondents to discuss issues that were not identified from the literature review.
We conducted in-depth interviews with 39 sales leaders and salespeople from 36 US
companies representing a variety of industries and geographic regions. We focused a subset
of our interviews on the technology sector, as industry publications suggest that this sector
is leading the way in leveraging the inside sales force as a strategic capability[2]. Our
conversations with sales professionals lasted up to 39 min (M = 22:37; max. = 39:20; min. =
9:45). Earlier interviews were longer to help identify general themes, while the later ones
were shorter because they focused more on the cross-validation of previous findings
(McCracken, 1988). To ensure that our interviews provided adequate variance in perspective
(i.e. maximum variation sampling), we interviewed sales professionals who held a variety of
titles in organizations as small as three people and as large as 50,000 people (Global Fortune
500 firms). The gender composition of our sample reflects the under-representation of
women in sales and technology (Gellman and Wells, 2016).

Study 2 protocol and script

A key insight from Study 1 indicated that the organizational structure in which inside
salespeople operate influenced the functions of their role. Thus, we returned to the field to
conduct Study 2 to delve deeper into the benefits and costs, both strategic and operational, of
various inside sales configurations and their implications for inside sales roles. From a
review of the practitioner literature and the structure-related themes emerging from Study 1,
we identified four inside sales force configuration archetypes that industry uses to guide our
discussions (Insidesales.com, 2016). However, we allowed respondents to use their own
terminology when describing their inside sales organization configurations. Our
conversations explored the role of inside and outside salespeople in customer retention,
acquisition and maintenance; the power and value of inside versus outside sales force; and
the type of conflicts that may occur. Study 2 consisted of a separate sample of 14 inside and
outside salespeople and sales leaders. These in-depth interviews lasted up to 37 min
(M = 30:19; max. = 37:10; min. = 9:15), excluding time when respondents took the
conversation off the record to discuss issues unrelated to our research questions. All
participating companies had both an inside and an outside sales force and represented a
variety of industries.
Data analysis. For both studies, two members of the research team read the 176 pages of
transcripts and identified the first-order categories through open and in vivo coding. Then,
the two members grouped these first-order categories into code groups that were then
categorized into second-order, more abstract categories. We report both first- and second-
order categories in the studies. One research assistant, blind to the purpose of the study,
independently coded the full set of transcripts. When differences emerged, the entire
research team discussed the various interpretations and reached agreement on the final
coding. Involving multiple people in the coding process (both those knowledgeable about
and those blind to the study’s purpose) increases the study’s credibility, integrity,
conformability and transferability (Strauss and Corbin, 1997). The average inter-judge
reliability was above the 0.7 thresholds (Rust and Cooil, 1994).
Study 1: differences between inside and outside sales roles and capabilities Inside sales
As noted previously, Study 1 investigates the important differences between inside and force
outside sales roles and the impact of technology. Specifically, from a JD-R perspective
(Bakker and Demerouti, 2007), we aimed to identify key differences between inside and
outside sales roles in the demands imposed on them and the resources available to achieve
their work goals and development. The following factors derived from prior research on the
drivers of salesperson performance, social selling and sales force control systems guided our
interviews and coding:
1035

technical knowledge;

selling skills;

interpersonal skills;

aptitude;

organizational skills; and

salesperson characteristics.

It is important to note that though these factors were the starting point, our qualitative
approach did not constrain us to these six categories. We also discussed job characteristics,
sales force configurations and control. In the following sub-sections and Table III, we
summarize these differences and provide illustrative interview comments for context.

Job characteristics
Skill variety. Unlike previous characterizations that inside salespeople focus on recurring,
simpler tasks, such as the call center role of a telemarketer (Boyle, 1996; Narus and
Anderson, 1986), our respondents noted that contemporary inside salespeople engage in a
variety of tasks and experience more demanding job responsibilities, similar to outside
salespeople. They also noted that inside salespeople must become more proficient at
accessing customers’ digital body language, defined as the aggregate of all digital activities
buyers perform when buying (e.g. what websites customers are visiting, where on a website
do customers linger) or all digital activities salespeople perform in selling (Woods, 2010).
Consequently, inside salespeople appear to have additional resources (and demands)
available from the customer’s or prospect’s digital engagement.
Task identity and significance. The contemporary inside sales force is also tasked with
engaging more heavily with cold, unqualified, dormant and/or smaller prospects.
Contemporary inside sales organizations manage small customers from start to finish and
handle prospecting and development activities for mid- and enterprise-level customers
requiring a combination of sales, service and prospecting skills resulting in moderate-to-
high task significance. An outside sales representative at a technology company commented
on this shift to a broader, more significant role of the inside sales force:
We have lower-level customers that the inside person is responsible for and upper-level customers
that the outside person is responsible for. But at the same time, the inside salesperson also
supports the outside salesperson on those higher-level customers.
Task autonomy. We also observed more flexibility associated with the outside sales role
because the inside salesperson remains, surprisingly, restricted to stringent processes.
Because high job demands and low levels of control are important predictors of negative
psychological outcomes (Karasek, 1979; Schnall et al., 1994), JD-R theory suggests that
managers may need to reconsider the empowerment afforded to the inside sales role.
EJM Higher-order Lower-order Contemporary inside
54,5 dimensions dimensions salespeople Outside salespeople

Job characteristics Skill variety Moderate to high, depending High

on configurations
Task identity Low to high, depending on High
configurations
1036 Task significance Moderate to high, depending High
on configurations
Task autonomy Moderate High
Feedback More, from supervisors, Most, from supervisors
customers and outside sales and customer
Technical knowledge Sales-related Broad Deep
knowledge
Social media use Regularly Limited
Analytics Regularly Limited
Selling skills Solution selling Solution identification and Solution development
support
Interpersonal skills Adaptiveness Higher Highest
Cognitive empathy Voice, video, text and other Voice and body language
digital cues
Aptitude Cognitive ability Moderate to high High
Emotional Moderate to high High
intelligence
Organizational skills Teamwork and Customer, outside sales and Customer, inside sales and
Table III. navigation internal functions internal functions
Study 1 findings: Sales force control Control strategy Behavioral based to hybrid Outcome based
how industry system Compensation plan Salary with performance- Performance based
based component
informants perceive Salesperson Profile Younger, less experienced Older, more experienced
differences between characteristics Extraversion Moderate Highest
inside and outside
salespeoplea Note: aThe focus is only on major thematic differences uncovered in study 1 during our in-depth interviews

Outside sales representatives and sales leaders believed tight scripts were critical for inside
sales success, while those holding the inside role noted that flexibility in enacting the role
results in greater success. This quote exemplifies the outside sales representative
perspective:
What makes a good inside sales organization is that you have a super, super tight process of what
it is that the inside sales rep’s going to do, what they’re going to ask, what they’re not going to
ask, and how they’re going to work with the field rep.

Feedback. Today’s inside salespeople face an unprecedented amount of feedback and

emotional labor as they fulfill a wider, more complex range of customer responsibilities
(Harris, 2013). A sales representative from a plastics firm stated that, compared with the
outside sales force, the inside sales force “experiences more rejection, and they have to take a
‘can-do’ attitude and smile with every call.” The nature of the contemporary inside sales job
has important implications for sales management, suggesting that sales managers need to
provide even more support (e.g. psychosocial resources) to inside salespeople than sales
leaders anticipate. For example, a sales director noted how rejection affects the inside sales
force’s resilience:
 Mental toughness is important; you hear “no” a lot, or even worse – you hear nothing!You might Inside sales
have great messaging but, for reasons beyond your control, prospects don’t reply, so you need to
be resilient and believe in yourself.
force
By contrast, the outside sales force calls on a client base that includes both existing and
prospective customers. The contact patterns skew in parallel with the role; the inside sales
force has limited face-to-face interactions with customers, which can lead to even higher
levels of rejection because it is more difficult to openly reject a person in a face-to-face 1037
meeting (Sommer and Bernieri, 2014).
In summary, our data suggest that depending on the inside–outside sales force
configurations, the job demands imposed on the inside sales force vary. However, in general,
our data suggest the job demands for the contemporary inside salespeople are increasing
while task autonomy continues to lag that experienced by the outside sales force. This
mismatch between job demands and resources creates resource-depleting tension in the
work environment for contemporary inside salespeople.

Technical knowledge
Sales-related knowledge. Respondents noted significant differences between the inside and
outside sales roles in terms of market and company knowledge (both breadth and depth).
Because inside salespeople now engage with prospects and customers on a variety of issues (e.g.
products, services and exploring needs), they are more likely to develop a broad, but somewhat
shallow, understanding of selling situations, as summarized by a key account representative:
In the inside role, reps see more sales calls [quantity of calls], so they can develop a broader
understanding. However, they do not get to go as deep in the selling process.
Conversely, the level of engagement that outside salespeople can secure with their
customers translates into much deeper contextual knowledge of selling situations and
customer needs. Consequently, outside salespeople appear to access greater engagement
resources for their roles.
Digital marketing, social media use and analytics. Today’s inside salespeople identify
and build customer relationships using a plethora of technology and social media platforms.
The inside sales role has evolved such that salespeople can develop their own digital body
language (i.e. the aggregate of all digital activities they perform in selling) and digital identity
beyond the selling firm’s contact name (Bonney and Williams, 2009; Woods, 2010). The
information associated with a digital identity permits automated user authentication at the
individual seller level (Technopedia, 2018). For example, some companies task inside
salespeople with re-marketing to potential customers who visit the company’s website and
leave a digital footprint but do not fill out contact forms. Other companies entrust inside
salespeople with technology-based tools to predict, which prospects will become customers
and which are the best candidates for cross-selling.
Respondents also acknowledged how social media is transforming the B2B sales process.
While social media usage was acknowledged as important to both inside and outside
salespeople in creating customer value (Agnihotri et al., 2012), our data indicate important
differences between these groups regarding its usage. A consistent theme from our
interviews indicates that the accrued time advantages to inside salespeople (because they do
not travel to visit customers) lead to the expectation that they will use social media and sales
force automation technologies to a greater extent to connect with prospects and customers.
An account specialist noted:
EJM [It is a] massive element of this [inside] role. Many different platforms are employed by this
division to connect with clients in many different ways.
54,5
Respondents indicated that the inside sales force’s access to more data makes inside
salespeople better suited to leverage CRM systems and use analytics throughout the sales
process. Given that CRM represents both a resource (information and connections) and a
demand (knowledge and time), the more extensive usage of CRM systems taxes inside
1038 salespeople in unique ways. When CRM initiatives fail to achieve their objectives (which is
more common than not; Finnegan and Currie, 2010), the resulting dysfunction is likely to
impose greater demands and role stress on inside salespeople than their outside
counterparts. For example, missing or incorrect prospect data would more negatively affect
outbound phone prospecting success as compared to a face-to-face prospect fact-finding
meeting (e.g. easier to hang up a phone than to physically escort a salesperson out of your
office). Thus, it appears the contemporary inside sales role captures both an enhanced use of
sales and marketing tools (i.e. job responsibilities) and greater customer responsibilities (i.e.
job demands), which raises job complexity to a level of an outside sales role.

Selling skills
The aforementioned changes demand a higher level of selling skills among inside salespeople
because they are now more involved in solution selling, though the extent of involvement
depends on the inside–outside configuration (we discuss this result again in Study 2). The
digitally mediated inside selling context may pose more unique demands than the outside
selling role because digital mediation introduces a barrier to solution-oriented selling (Bonney
and Williams, 2009). For example, one account manager from the financial services industry
noted the difficulty in conducting virtual meetings to uncover customer needs:
On complex solutions, it would often be difficult to capture all the decision makers on an inside
sales call. [It] seems like customers find it easier to move [cancel] virtual meetings rather than a
scheduled in-person visit.
While basic selling skills such as listening and patience are important for all sales
professionals, the additional non-verbal and contextual cues available to outside salespeople
are critical to their effectiveness in relationship development and interpretation of
customers’ commitment level (Weitz et al., 1986). We recognize that today’s inside
salespeople increasingly have access to video technology to provide access to non-verbal
buyer cues, however, the primary means of communication is still by telephone, which is
partly because of the reliability challenges of video conferencing (Daim et al., 2012). As a
result, not having face-to-face customer access puts greater demands on the inside sales
force, as one informant noted:
Outside sales reps have deeper interactions with customers when visiting in person. They may
see the problem firsthand, while inside salespeople hear from the customer’s point of view. This
allows the outside sales rep to better tailor the sales pitch to [the] customer’s problem.

Interpersonal skills
Adaptiveness. The inside sales force used to focus on order-taking via the telephone, which
did not require a high level of adaptive selling (Marshall and Vredenburg, 1988; Narus and
Anderson, 1986). However, our respondents noted that while both the inside and outside
sales force must adapt to their customers’ social cues and product needs, the inside sales
force relies predominantly on vocal and textual cues from its primary contact by telephone,
e-mail and social media. In line with this theme, the inside sales role involves increasingly Inside sales
higher job demands associated with remote communication: force
Inside [sales] are less adaptive and less able to alter behavior as they become almost robotic in
their responses. Even the highest-grossing inside sales reps have a hard time adjusting to the
nature of the sales situation, as they are behind a desk and do not get to see body language.
Cognitive empathy. We also find that the interpersonal skills necessary for the inside sales
role require a different type of persona. For example, there are nuanced differences in how 1039
the salesperson characteristic of empathy surfaces in different roles. Specifically, empathy is
especially demanding for inside salespeople to experience because they do not have access
to body language, as this sales manager shared:
I think this is one of the toughest challenges for inside salespeople. In my current role, we engage
in teaming, which allows us to bring an inside sales specialist on calls when I am in the field [. . .].
During the debrief, the inside reps typically want to know how the body language was – and often
times when you have someone who is monotone or very analytical, it’s hard to interpret that over
the phone.
Inside salespeople must also have the ability to suspend feelings of impatience when
interacting with prospects and customers, lest they come across as too aggressive.
Consequently, the inside sales role is more constricting in terms of the range of emotions
that can be shared with a prospective customer. A keen ability to listen and learn versus
simply reading from a script also characterizes a strong inside sales performer because “an
inside rep is reliant on what the customer tells you versus what you see for yourself,”
according to an account representative. Thus, our data suggest that previous expectations
for inside salesperson latitude for action are too narrow, as customers demand greater inside
salesperson adaptability and flexibility.

Aptitude
Consistent with the expanded inside sales role, our data suggest that companies have raised
their expectations of inside salespeople’s cognitive and emotional intelligence in recruitment,
development and retention. This implies that part of the ideal candidate profile of the
contemporary inside sales position is the ability to bring more resources to these higher-
level job demands. An enhanced aptitude appears to be in response to the expectation that
inside salespeople need to excel in skills such as analytics and information technology, as we
alluded to previously. Conversely, the richer context afforded by face-to-face sales
interactions provides outside salespeople more resources in leveraging the “traditional”
skills expected of a salesperson. One key account sales representative summarized the
differences between the two sales roles:
I think outside salespeople have greater emotional intelligence. An outside sales call generally has
higher financial impact at stake than inside sales, which affects the sales rep’s stress level and,
therefore, emotional intelligence. Since inside sales relies on the phone, inside sales [has] the phone
as a buffer to physical response.

Organizational skills
When inside sales served a telemarketing function, there was little reason for interaction
with the outside sales force or other internal departments (Narus and Anderson, 1986), and
thus, organizational and team-building skills were less important to job success. Today’s
inside sales role includes building relationships with smaller accounts and partnering with
EJM outside sales on larger accounts. Consequently, our data reveal a heavy demand for
54,5 organization skills and teamwork on the part of inside salespeople.
Inside salespeople must also possess skills to orchestrate and navigate both the
customer’s buying center and the selling firm’s internal sales processes (Plouffe and Barclay,
2007). However, respondents also noted the increased difficulty for the inside sales force to
marshal the necessary resources (e.g. people’s time and technical support) to meet its goals,
1040 indicating that today’s inside salesperson experience a higher level of job demands and
potential role stress with fewer resources. Because of the appeal of the “size of the prize”
associated with outside sales opportunities (i.e. larger sales deals), the outside salesperson
tends to experience fewer obstacles. This view was supported by an account manager from
a plastics firm:
Inside reps have difficulty aligning resources, mostly because the revenues and margins on inside
sales activities [are] lower. As a result, more resources are dedicated to larger revenue
opportunities, making it more difficult for inside reps to navigate the sales process.
Similarly, an associate director detailed the challenge of obtaining resources for inside sales:
Inside sales is more complicated because the money factor is minimized. Politics and power
within the organization are additional considerations, which makes inside sales transactions more
complicated.
Our data suggest that the most productive inside salespeople accumulate more resources by
spending more effort developing internal relationships, which, in turn, allow them to
mobilize intra-firm social capital when necessary. This finding is consistent with renewed
interest in salespeople’s internal navigation behavior (Plouffe et al., 2016).

Sales force control

Our interviews also provide insights into the way firms are managing their inside sales
force. While the inside sales force was historically compensated on a salary basis (Marshall
and Vredenburg, 1988), our data suggest that such plans are no longer appropriate, as the
nature of inside sales jobs has evolved from script-based sales tasks to more complex sales,
CRM and revenue responsibilities. As a result, many firms in our study have begun
incorporating a higher percentage of variable compensation for inside salespeople. However,
compared with the inside sales force, the compensation plan for the outside sales force
generally provides a higher variable component, yielding higher target outcomes. An
outside sales representative for a technology firm provided insight into the specific
differences:
Our inside sales folks are compensated differently. They have a base salary with some sort of
commission plan, whereas ours [outside sales] is a little bit more leveraged and we have the
autonomy to sell whatever we want to sell.
Consequently, the data also suggest that the contemporary B2B inside sales force is subject
to hybrid control systems while the outside sales role is more likely to use outcome-based
control systems. The nature of these control system differences introduces another resource
constraint, namely, latitude for deciding how to accomplish goals into the world of the inside
salesforce. A sales leader described the differences:
Inside sales teams are highly metrics-driven. How many calls did you make? What’s the talk time?
[. . .]. Outside sales reps don’t care. Their bosses probably don’t care.
With advances in CRM technology, firms can track and monitor inside sales force Inside sales
behavioral activities more closely. Using different control systems, however, appears to force
result in different job attitudes and levels of organizational commitment between inside and
outside sales organizations (Oliver and Anderson, 1994), as noted by an inside salesperson:
It can be a very micromanagement kind of style. I think you tend to see that play itself more in
inside sales.
1041
Salesperson characteristics
Study 1 also reveals key differences in the target profiles for the two types of positions. The
respondents indicated that inside salespeople tended to be younger and more inexperienced
than their outside sales counterparts. As a technology sales manager noted,
Our inside sales folks are a lot earlier in tenure, earlier in career, so their focus is career growth
and projection: So how do I get promoted, how do I move on, who’s giving me the support to be
able to do that?
However, the respondents also indicated that demographics of the inside sales force
continues to broaden to older age groups with more experience, which indicates the dynamic
nature of this changing role. Consequently, bringing additional sales and business
experience as a resource to the inside sales role promises to counter the higher demands that
such roles appear to present.
We also find that the two sales roles require different types of persona. The respondents
emphasized that while extraversion is a key success trait for the outside sales role “because
you have to build a personal connection with the client and they have to like you,” it is less
critical for the inside sales role. After an inside salesperson connects on the telephone with a
prospect, the cadence of the exchange is more direct (and often shorter in length) than the
cadence of a face-to-face exchange in which more pleasantries and personal information are
often shared.

Discussion
Data from Study 1 reveal several differences between inside and outside sales forces.
Importantly, these differences underlie three major themes, which we summarize in the
middle panel of Figure 2. First, inside salespeople’s task significance and complexity and
technical requirements have increased, becoming more similar to those of contemporary
outside salespeople. Specifically, the inside sales force’s expanding role requires a broader
set of skills, including the ability to interpret verbal and digital cues, handle high levels of
rejection, and manage and develop smaller accounts to better communicate with customers.
In addition, our data reveal high levels of internal boundary-spanning activities, indicating
the need for team-building skills. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to
expand understanding of the inside sales role in these dimensions. Furthermore, inside
salespeople’s responsibilities are broad and involve developing virtual customer
relationships through activities such as proactively solving customer problems, managing
customer order cycle times and handling routine customer contacts (Marshall et al., 2012).
These responsibilities used to be performed primarily by outside salespeople. Additionally,
although sales technology is important to both sales roles, inside salespeople are using
enterprise technology (e.g. CRM systems and routing tools) and other digital tools (e.g. social
media platforms, e-mail and VoIP) more extensively for customer interactions and to gather
and disseminate customer and prospect information to the outside sales force, making face-
EJM to-face sales calls more efficient and effective. On average, the strategic value of the inside
54,5 sales force is increasing.
Second, although firms have begun modifying their control and compensation systems to
accommodate these changes, many inside salespeople in our study believe they are under-
compensated relative to outside salespeople. Finally, in comparing data across respondents,
we observe significant heterogeneity in how they describe the inside sales force’s strategic
1042 benefits, new roles and increasing job demands. Our analysis suggests that this
heterogeneity is a direct consequence of the configurations firms use to structure theirs
inside and outside sales forces. We delve deeper into this theme in Study 2.

Study 2: benefits and costs of inside–outside sales force configurations

Study 2 investigates how firms configure their inside–outside sales organizations and the
benefits and costs of doing so. We explore two critical issues:
(1) the structural designs that B2B firms use to coordinate inside and outside
salespeople; and
(2) the strategic and operational benefits and costs of each design.

For each configuration, we pay attention to the incremental value of the inside sales force to
the firm’s CRM processes and the coordination with the outside sales force to explain the
variation in the inside sales force’s strategic value, expansive roles and increasing job
demands we found in Study 1.
From the structure-related themes emerging from Study 1 and the consistency of those
themes with our review of the practitioner literature (Insidesales.com, 2016), we identified
four major inside B2B sales force configuration archetypes as follows:
(1) inbound sales or sales support;
(2) sales development;
(3) team/hybrid; and
(4) discrete.

These four configurations correspond to different levels of B2B inside salespeople’s

engagement with customers, ranging from low to high. In our interviews, we discussed with
respondents the benefits and costs of each configuration and coded the emerging themes
into company, customer and intra-sales force constructs. We reflect these benefits and costs
in the upper half of the right-hand panel of Figure 2 as:

company and customer processes (at the strategic level);

intra-sales force processes (at the operational level); and

outcomes (both strategic and operational levels).

We summarize each configuration’s benefits and costs in Table IV and highlight them in the
following discussion.

Inbound sales or sales support configuration

The inbound sales or sales support configuration is where the inside sales or sales support
role typically provides overlay resources to the outside salespeople in areas in which the
inside sales force has a specific product or technical knowledge and can provide additional
customer support. Because of the focus on the back end of the sales process, there is little or
no impact on customer acquisition. The primary benefit of this configuration, however, is
Benefits and Inbound sales or
costs Dimensions sales support Sales development Team/hybrid Discrete

Description Technical or product Lead qualifiers who set Inside sales using an overlay quota Inside salespeople selling
experts, typically an appointments for outside while working with outside sales; without involvement of
overlay resource to sales may travel to meet clients outside sales
outside sales
Company and Customer (Low) (Moderate) (High) (High)
customer acquisition Dedicated support and Qualification step Inside–outside work together as a Dedicated customer
benefits and effectiveness cross-selling opportunities completed by inside sales, team acquisition, sometimes
costs by inside sales but inconsistencies exist even large customers
Customer (þ/) (þ) (þ) (þ)
retention Improve services. Primarily performed by Cross-sell, upsell, maintain strong Focus on previously
effectiveness Customer may receive outside sales relationships by working as a team underserved customer
conflicting information segment
from each sales force
Sales process (þ) (þ) () (þ)
leanness/ Reduces time spent by Reduces time spent by More coordination as a team Separation shortens the
efficiency outside sales on customer outside sales on cycle, allows for more
support and cross-selling qualifying leads flexibility
Intra-sales force Inside–outside () () (þ/) (NA)
benefits and relationship Inside–outside Minimal relationship Relationship between inside and Separate incentives
costs quality miscommunication between inside and outside sales requiring a high level Clear sales credit
outside sales of customer information sharing assignment
Limited inside–outside
information sharing
Inside sales () () () ()
turnover issues Difficult to find and retain High rejection rate Compensation differentials can be High rejection/failure rate
combination of service Low investment by the demoralizing Low compensation
and sales skills firm Conflict with outside sales
Inside sales () () (þ) (þ)
development Learning is narrowly Learning is narrowly Learning is broader/more training Direct customer-oriented
opportunities focused on product and focused on qualifying Indirect customer-oriented learning learning
technical issues prospects Inside sales as a stepping
stone

sales force
Study 2 key findings:
Table IV.
Inside sales

structural differences
1043
force

of inside-outside
benefits, costs and

configurations
EJM the additional level of service provided to customers when they need immediate attention,
54,5 which improves customer retention. Customers can conveniently call an inside salesperson
whenever they have a product question or a service issue. The inbound sales/sales support
configuration also provides an additional sales channel for up- or cross-selling opportunities
while freeing up the outside salesperson to grow the relationship without spending time on
technical or service-related issues.
1044 This configuration has three limitations. First, the transition between inside and outside
sales is often not seamless, leading to various internal and external issues. Transitioning
work between parties (inside and outside) can lead to conflict between the two sales forces
and ultimately result in dissatisfied customers. Second, as inside salespeople in this
configuration are focused on support and service issues, their development is limited. Third,
finding qualified inside salespeople who are different from service-center-only or
telemarketer types is challenging. Because the position has a customer service component,
identifying people who are adept at both selling and customer service (i.e. ambidextrous) can
be difficult, as a sales manager in the financial services industry noted:
We just don’t have the workforce we’re looking for right now. We have plenty with the call center
mentality, but we’re looking for more than just a call center, order-taking mentality for inside
sales. We’re looking for someone who can talk to that customer, can sell to that customer, and
create a relationship and a need over the phone.

Sales development configuration

In the sales development configuration, the primary role of the inside sales force is to
generate qualified leads for the outside sales force. Some respondents referred to this task
division as the hand-off model. An inside salesperson in the hand-off model is primarily
tasked with enhancing the outside sales force’s productivity and efficiency by uncovering
qualified prospects through online customer inquiries, outbound telephone and e-mail
activity, and other web-based tools (e.g. LinkedIn and Web inquiries). The respondents
agreed that this relatively inexpensive configuration has many benefits. First, it is effective
for prospecting new customers, thereby providing outside salespeople with valuable selling
time to build relationships and increase retention. Second, because of the clearly defined
roles in terms of how customers are transitioned between inside and outside sales, this
configuration reduces conflict between the parties while also providing a clear transition
point for the customer. Third, as a sales representative from the technology industry
succinctly put it, this structure can result in a “leaner sales process. You don’t have five
people on the call when you only really need two.”
However, there are also limitations. First, the lack of an ongoing relationship between
inside and outside salespeople could limit relationship building and information sharing.
Second, it leads to high turnover because of high rejection rates by prospects and/or low
investments by companies in training and development. Such training deficiencies also lead
to inconsistencies in lead qualification. As a sales manager in the electrical industry noted,
“some do a better job than others.” Respondents also noted that they hire younger, more
inexperienced people for this role and assess their potential for future customer-facing roles,
such as outside sales, while they serve in the inside position. This hiring practice also
appears to contribute to some turnover problems experienced by respondents in our study.
Third, respondents also indicated that inside salesperson performance was typically
measured by behavioral outcome metrics (e.g. number of calls made), resulting in less focus
on strategic, customer-oriented outcomes. This focus on behavioral control is consistent
with our findings in Study 1. If learning is heavily focused on qualifying prospects, the Inside sales
inside sales force may not develop adequate customer service skills. force
Team/hybrid configuration
In the team/hybrid configuration, firms assign an inside salesperson to work with one or
more outside salespeople to collaborate as a team to support a specified set of customers. For
example, an inside sales manager for an electronics firm works “hand-in-hand with the field 1045
to make sure that customers get what they want.” A key distinction between the team and
hybrid models is that the inside salesperson in the team configuration typically has no face-
to-face customer contact, while in the hybrid configuration, inside salespeople are
encouraged to occasionally meet face-to-face with their customers.
As both inside and outside sales representatives acquire and retain customers, this
configuration has the potential to significantly improve the firm’s CRM effectiveness. The
hybrid approach further blurs the line between the inside and outside sales forces. For
example, many firms in our sample require the inside salesperson to set up opportunities to
engage in face-to-face customer interactions to enhance customer “stickiness.” An inside
sales manager in the steel industry noted the following about this approach:
I promise you, it’s harder to yell at somebody when you have met them face-to-face. Because if we
do make a mistake, and it puts a customer in a bind, we want that relationship to be there with the
inside salesperson so that they can solve it.
However, the team/hybrid configuration requires a high degree of inside–outside sales force
coordination, especially customer information sharing (Salojärvi and Saarenketo, 2013). For
example, the sales manager for an electrical distribution firm expects both the inside and
outside sales force to have similar customer knowledge:
If they cannot get the outside sales rep, they can call the inside rep, and he has all the information.
He can provide you with a quote because he understands your pricing structures, he understands
when you need stuff, where you need stuff, your jobs, and everything else.
Although this team-based selling configuration is intended to foster a greater customer-
linking capability (Day, 1994) to maintain customer continuity, the potential for
miscommunication between the inside and outside sales organization increases with the
hybrid configuration because of the overly close relationship (and overlapping activities) of
the two parties. A sales manager noted the communication challenges for both sales forces:
[On the] inside, our biggest complaint is not as much communication as we would like [. . .]. And
probably the biggest complaint from the field is us working on something, and we forgot to copy
them on it.
To overcome these negative issues, firms that adopt this configuration are likely to invest
more in training and developing inside salespeople. As a result, inside salespeople in this
configuration have greater opportunities to develop. Furthermore, their training would
extend beyond intra-firm learning to customer interactions.
Equity issues are the main challenge of this configuration. First, opportunities for
development might be viewed as political decisions. One firm in our sample only promotes
the top inside salespeople to the team-based sales position and then provides an extensive
training program to ensure tight collaboration between the two sales roles. Inside
salespeople in another technology firm had low morale as promotion opportunities for these
salespeople were not well explained. Second, differences in compensation policies can
negatively affect internal relationship building. Some inside salespeople in the team model
EJM are paid on a salary basis, while the outside sales force has a variable compensation
54,5 component. These differences can lead to motivational differences between the two parties
(Oliver and Anderson, 1994).

Discrete configuration
Finally, in the discrete configuration, the inside sales force is responsible for managing the
1046 entire sales cycle, including identifying prospects, collecting customer information,
diagnosing problems and application needs, recommending suitable solutions and
providing customer support. Most firms in our sample implemented this model to capture
small and medium-sized sales opportunities (i.e. not key accounts). A few respondents,
however, indicated that the discrete sales role was responsible for establishing and
maintaining relationships with larger customers. Firms selling commodity-type products, in
which the nature of the customer dialogue is limited to a few key issues, such as price,
delivery and availability, were more likely to use this approach. For example, an inside sales
manager in the steel industry noted that “on the transactional side, all of our accounts are
assigned to an inside salesperson.” These units operate autonomously as they prospect for
new customers. The discrete model appears to be in widespread use as a lower-cost service
model, which offers simplicity in rewarding sales credits.
The strategic value of the discrete inside sales force was frequently mentioned. For
example, a sales manager in the steel industry articulated its importance as follows:
A good inside salesperson can make or break your relationship. Some [customers] don’t care
about the outside guy.
One firm recently eliminated its discrete internal sales force, which resulted in a sharp
rebuke:
If I had my way, I’d change back to having our dedicated inside sales team that had customer
ownership from beginning to end. I think we made a mistake getting rid of that.
Inside salespeople in this model are and should be, treated as equally important as outside
salespeople. An inside sales manager at a manufacturing firm, who had been part of the
inside sales force for 19 years, summed up her role as follows:
So really, aside from getting in the car and going to job sites, you’re doing everything that the
outside salesperson does.
This configuration also has several limitations. First, we found that most respondents
perceived the discrete inside sales force to be limited in its ability to proactively develop and
grow customer accounts compared with outside salespeople. The lack of face-to-face
customer interactions inhibits the potential to turn implicit needs, through questioning and
observation, into explicit product needs. For example, the sales manager of a distribution
firm noted that this eventually affects account growth:
I have one company in my territory that’s been designated as an inside account. But the inside
salesperson is growing it at a snail’s pace. I could grow the account much faster, so this is
affecting my productivity.
Second, firms struggle with recruiting talented discrete inside salespeople. One reason is
that firms are less willing to invest as much in the inside sales model as in the outside sales
force. A sales manager in an industrial firm believed that better compensation could
improve the inside sales talent level:
 I feel like we should pay them [the inside salesperson] a little bit more so that we can get more Inside sales
quality people in the role. Because that’s been a major challenge for me – their competency and
understanding the strategy and what it is we’re doing and ramping them up at a faster pace. But
force
the company is really trying to reduce the cost of doing business with our customers, and this is
their channel in doing that.
In terms of development, many respondents also indicated that the discrete salesperson role
provides a good entry-level sales position to manage the entire sales process. However, some 1047
salespeople are making a career of the inside sales role because of personal lifestyle choices
(less travel time) and personality fit. A sales manager made the following comment:
I do have inside salespeople who are very happy doing inside sales, and that’s what they want to
do.

Discussion
Study 2’s findings complement Study 1’s findings by providing two key explanations for the
heterogeneity among inside salespeople uncovered in Study 1. We summarize these
differences in how they describe their strategic importance and job demands in Figure 2.
First, inside–outside configurations have differential benefits and costs and differ along
several structural dimensions. Second, each configuration generates differential job
demands, role stress and resources among inside salespeople, especially customer
responsibilities and relationships with outside salespeople. Several informants noted that
because having multiple configurations allows firms to leverage these benefits and
overcome the costs, firms may adopt more than one inside sales force configuration.
Specifically, as Table IV shows, comparing the first to the last configuration, inside
salespeople’s job characteristics and the required skills appear to become incrementally
more demanding. Accordingly, firms are also experiencing more significant challenges in
how they manage the relationship between inside and outside sales and select inside
salespeople. Moreover, when the inside sales force has its own customer segment, as in the
discrete configuration, the inside sales force’s strategic value to the firm increases
significantly. These differences thus explain the variation we observed in Study 1.
Furthermore, Table IV indicates that, while different configurations may deliver similar
benefits and costs, the mechanisms through which these arise are dissimilar, depending on
how the inside and outside sales forces interact with each other and the customer (i.e.
equifinality). The level of customer interaction can vary from service only (sales support) or
prospecting only (sales development) to managing the entire sales process (hybrid and
discrete). Across all the configurations, except discrete, there is task interdependence
between the inside and outside sales forces to meet customer needs, therein which lies
potential conflicts. Finally, when there are a common customer and corporate outcomes, as
in the hybrid configuration, the increased interaction should improve the relationship
between the inside and outside sales force.

General discussion
Firms are increasingly turning to their inside sales forces to reduce costs, provide strong
customer support and broaden customer relationships. Yet, the sales academy has largely
ignored investigations into the evolving differences between the inside and outside sales
roles and the benefits and costs of sales force configurations. Our research fills these
important research gaps.
EJM Theoretical implications
54,5 In this section, we briefly discuss the theoretical implications of our findings around three
primary themes as follows:
(1) the evolving roles and capabilities of the inside sales force;
(2) antecedents and consequences of firms’ choice of inside–outside sales force
configurations; and
1048 (3) the impact of technology on the inside sales force in customer-facing activities and
internal coordination.

Based on this discussion, we offer a research agenda that includes a series of specific
questions to help guide future research (Table V).
Evolving roles and capabilities of the inside sales force. Our study provides much-needed
insight into why and how the contemporary inside sales role differs from the outside sales
role, as an understanding of inside sales has largely been based on research conducted more
than 20 years ago (Boyle, 1996; Marshall and Vredenburg, 1988; Narus and Anderson, 1986).
Our up-to-date and comprehensive perspective on the expanded role of the inside sales force
also sheds light on how corporate, customer and technological changes have helped to shape
important differences between the inside and outside sales roles.
Our findings are the first to provide a more comprehensive comparison of the inside and
outside sales roles and capabilities across several dimensions. This comparison is important
because prior research has largely focused on capabilities that lead to outside salesperson
success (Churchill et al., 1985). By clarifying the distinct roles of inside and outside sales, we
account for differences in capabilities and avoid bundling two potentially distinct roles into
a single perspective. These differences are critical to understanding the role of inside sales in
the contemporary sales environment and evaluating the future value of inside salespeople to
selling firms (Kumar et al., 2014). In this research, we have not empirically demonstrated the
performance implications of these evolving roles and capabilities. Therefore, it will be useful
for future research to examine several research questions pertaining to the performance
impact of the evolving issues related to job characteristics, control and compensation and
human resources uncovered in our study. For example, given the enhanced strategic role of
today’s inside sales force, it would be interesting to investigate, using a cross-industry
sample, the differential impact of inside and outside salespeople on firm performance along
with potential moderating factors such as compensation and/or control system differences.
Antecedents and consequences of firms’ choice of inside–outside sales force
configurations. In addition to sales roles, this research contributes to the sales literature by
providing deeper insights into the structure of the inside and outside sales organizations.
Because the responsibilities of the two roles often overlap, the organizational configuration
is important in establishing distinct responsibilities to improve cooperation and reduce
conflict. Our study takes the first step toward a more thorough academic examination of this
new area through the lens of structural marketing (Lee et al., 2015). In addition, whereas
previous research has focused primarily on the overall inside sales organization (Gessner
and Scott, 2009), our study is the first to provide insights into the major configurations that
firms use to organize their inside–outside sales forces; and how each configuration
differentially determines the benefits and costs for the company, its CRM processes, and
potential issues associated with outside and inside salespeople. Future research would
benefit by further exploring how industry, product type and firm characteristics jointly
determine a firm’s choice of inside-outside sales configurations.
Primary themes Secondary themes
The evolving roles and Job characteristics, aptitudes,
capabilities of the inside sales interpersonal and selling
force skills
Sales force control and
compensation issues
Salesperson profile and HR
issues
Antecedents and Inside–outside configuration
consequences of the firm choice
choice of the inside sales
organization
Structural marketing trade-
offs: differential influence of
structure on the benefits and
costs of the configurations
Sales force management
issues: Influence of structure
on relationship with other
functions within the seller
firm, with customers, and
inside–outside relationships
The impact of technology on Customer-facing
the inside sales force
Internal technology tools
Note: Some of these questions involve more than one theme
research questions
Table V.
Specific future
Research questions
What is the differential impact of inside and outside salespeople on firm performance (e.g. revenues, cost reduction and
customer-specific profitability)?
What are effective ways to help inside salespeople cope with high levels of rejection?
How do compensation structures vary between the inside and outside sales forces?
Given the correlates of control systems (Oliver and Anderson, 1994), how differently do inside salespeople respond to
control systems than outside salespeople?
Is there an ideal profile for inside sales representatives associated with lower turnover?
How should firms train inside and outside salespeople differently?
What are the antecedents to firms’ choice of a configuration or a combination of configurations?
How does the industry or product type influence the sales structure? Is there an optimal organizational structure for each
industry?
Is there a best organizational configuration fit for the inside sales force based on product characteristics (product breadth
and solution selling), customer characteristics (customer knowledge and segmentation) and company characteristics
(cost-reduction/revenue expansion and strategy type)?
Are there unique sources of role stress among inside salespeople?
How do inside-outside sales force configurations differ in terms of customer-centricity; customer–inside salesperson
interaction focus; task interdependence; and outcome interdependence? How do firms make trade-offs among these
factors in choosing a configuration?
How do these differences explain the differences in benefits and costs of the configurations (Table IV), as well as the job
demands and resources of inside salespeople (Tables II and III)?
What is the differential impact of inside and outside salespeople on customer outcomes (e.g. customer satisfaction and
customer retention)?
How do firms improve the working relationship among salespeople who are diverse in terms of demographic profiles,
technological savviness and personalities?
How do inside–outside sales force relationships influence inside and outside salesperson behaviors; (b) knowledge
sharing between the two sales forces; (c) customers; and (d) the firm?
What are internal stakeholders’ perspectives of the two sales forces? Are they considered equal?
What mechanisms enhance the collaboration between inside and outside salespeople?
What new technologies will have the greatest impact on buyer–seller relationships, and how will they affect the inside
sales force?
How do firm extract tacit knowledge from inside salespeople’s sales calls to train new hires?
How will mobile technology and artificial intelligence affect buyer–inside salesperson relationships?
Without face-to-face interactions with customers, how can inside salespeople read customers?
What are some customers’ digital cues that top performing inside salespeople rely on in their selling activities?
Why do some salespeople choose remote versus face-to-face interactions (and vice versa)?
As inside and outside sales functions increasingly share information, how should managers support the virtual team/
relationship?
Which social media tools are most effective for sourcing inside sales leads? Under what situation?
Inside sales
1049
force
EJM Our findings suggest that some configurations assign inside salespeople with more
54,5 customer relationship responsibility than others. These increased responsibilities elevate the
firm’s dependence on inside salespeople for both revenue generation and market insights.
Furthermore, these responsibilities represent greater work pressure and impose higher
levels of emotional labor among inside salespeople, thus elevating their job demands and
possible role overload. This represents another important area that future research can
1050 further explore. As an example, the role stress literature has not fully accounted for the
increasingly important within–sales force issues. Therefore, a useful research avenue would
be to examine unique sources of role stress among inside salespeople through behavioral
measures, such as a number of telephone calls made, e-mails processed, Web forms
completed, face-to-face meetings held and so on to better understand the triggers of potential
role overload.
Our findings also indicate that the levels of task and outcome interdependence vary
across the configurations. For example, both task and outcome interdependence between
inside and outside sales forces are, perhaps, much lower in the discrete configuration than in
the team/hybrid configuration. A direct implication of this variation is that each
configuration differs in the extent to which inside salespeople need to coordinate with their
outside counterparts during sales and CRM processes. While implementing common goals
in the team/hybrid configuration tends to promote collaboration in tasks with high outcome
interdependence, some firms may not be able to overcome the potential conflicts caused by
high levels of task and outcome interdependence (Dawes and Massey, 2005; Le Meunier-
FitzHugh and Piercy, 2007; Maltz and Kohli, 2000). Our study stops short of examining these
trade-offs. Therefore, research is needed to quantify the influence of structure on the benefits
and costs of the configurations by accounting for potential trade-offs among a number of
intervening factors such as task and outcome interdependence, customer centricity and
customer-inside salesperson relationship.
The differences in roles and configurations also have important implications for future
research on sales force management. For example, our findings show that inside salespeople
may behave very differently from outside salespeople; thus, researchers should carefully
consider the type of salespeople they study and delve deeper into specific roles to account for
the various configurations that drive inside salesperson behavior and performance.
Furthermore, researchers need to account for the sales force configuration, as the
configuration will give rise to different dynamics between inside and outside salespeople
and the evolution of customer relationships. This poses some interesting future research
avenues. For example, for firms competing on customer intimacy, which sales force
configuration has the most positive effect on its cross-process dialogues and revenues?
Other related research questions are shown in Table V.
The impact of technology on the inside sales force. Enhancements in the usefulness of
technology for selling (i.e. the internet, social media and mobile phones) have influenced how
the inside sales force builds and maintains relationships both within the firm and with
customers. For example, the inside sales force plays an increasingly strategic role in
building and maintaining customer relationships as customers become more comfortable
participating in virtual versus face-to-face relationships (Marshall et al., 2012; Rutherford
et al., 2014). Our findings confirm this trend. However, we have not delineated whether the
influence of these types of technologies depends on whether they are customer-facing or
internal tools. It will be useful for future research to determine the unique impact of each of
these two types of technologies on the inside sales force. For example, additional research is
needed to examine, which technology investments are most appropriate for inside
salespeople to enhance cash flows from higher margins, increased cross-selling and/or
reduced direct selling costs. From a talent-based development perspective, using technology Inside sales
to capture the implicit (or tacit) knowledge and insights from sales call dialogues, which are force
personal and context-specific, would also be an interesting research avenue. Finally, there is
an increased need for research that investigates how firms can leverage technology-driven
communication tools to positively influence the quality of shared customer information
between the inside and outside sales forces. In Table V, we identify several additional
questions for future research on the impact of technology on the evolving role of the inside
sales force. 1051

Managerial implications
Our findings provide significant implications for managers. First, our study informs
managers of the unique role of inside salespeople and how they differ from their outside
counterparts. Inside salespeople are no longer simply order takers; rather, they play an
increasingly important role in a firm’s attempts to create, build and sustain customer
relationships. In contrast with outside salespeople, inside salespeople primarily rely on
digital means, such as social media, and inbound and outbound telephone activities. The
high level of rejection and reliance on analyzing verbal and digital cues inherent to creating
and maintaining such relationships suggests that managers should be cognizant of the
stress this puts on employee morale and provide rewards and recognition for positive
performance. That is, managers should recognize unique inside sales tasks, understand
differences between the two sales positions, and adjust their management styles
accordingly. Similarly, our findings also inform the hiring process for today’s an inside sales
role. Recruits who hold positive perceptions of the usefulness of new technology (Robinson
et al., 2005), are skilled at analyzing verbal or digital cues, have a strong tenacity to
overcome failure, and are adept at teamwork appear particularly suitable for an inside sales
role. However, research examining the effects of these characteristics on performance is
required.
Second, the increasing use of the inside sales force to perform activities previously
performed by outside salespeople leads to new challenges both within and across the sales
functions. Within the inside sales force, concerns about increasing responsibilities and
compensation differences abound. To decrease conflict within and across the inside and
outside sales functions, responsibilities need to be clearly defined and the internal
relationships should be structured as collaborative, not competitive. As the inside sales force
converges with the outside sales force in terms of responsibilities, managers should also
ensure that compensation systems are integrated and differentiated in terms of
commissions, quotas and bonuses (Albrecht et al., 2014), as our study indicates inside
salespeople complained about a lower compensation base. Besides, our data suggest the
myriad behavioral controls common to the inside sales role limit task autonomy; therefore,
we recommend delimiting these controls to encourage more customer-centric and creative
selling behaviors.
Third, our study also informs managers of the issues inherent to various inside sales
configurations, which is useful in identifying, which configuration best addresses their
customers’ needs. For example, firms that rely heavily on online leads or cold-calling should
consider a sales development configuration that uses the inside sales force to qualify
prospects before handing them off to the outside sales force, thus reducing wasted time on
bad leads for outside salespeople. If a deep level of customer knowledge is required because
of a well-established, existing customer base, firms should select the sales team/hybrid
configuration because it encourages information sharing and leads to a deep level of
customer familiarity for both inside and outside salespeople. The discrete configuration
EJM provides the greatest benefit when small and medium-sized customers are under-served by
54,5 the outside sales force because the inside sales force can provide more dedicated contact for
these accounts. Finally, heavily service-oriented firms should consider an inbound sales or a
sales support configuration that provides both service and sales capabilities.
Fourth, managers need to consider the changing training needs for both functions.
Executives and inside salespeople may view the inside sales job as a training ground
1052 and/or a stepping-stone for future outside sales positions. However, as the inside sales
role increases in importance, both roles need similar training to ensure that salespeople
inhabiting the roles are prepared to provide value-enhancing contact with customers,
whether through digital or face-to-face means. Industry organizations indicate that
firms should provide specific training and development at the request of inside sales
managers and salespeople (Insidesales.com, 2016). Another consideration would be to
partner new inside salespeople with outside salespeople to gain a more thorough
understanding of the products and customers. We also recommend that managers
adjust their evaluation processes to ensure that inside sales hires are being evaluated
not only simply on their call-center or customer-service-type abilities but also on their
ability to gain product knowledge and upsell and cross-sell to customers. Finally, we
recommend defining and clarifying career advancement opportunities for inside
salespeople to reduce turnover.

Notes
1. We replicated this result over three consecutive years across different customer regions.
2. The current and former leaders of the American Association of Inside Sales Professionals, an
international association dedicated exclusively to advancing the profession of inside sales,
predominantly represent the technology sector (www.aa-isp.org/advisory-board).

References
Agnihotri, R., Dingus, R., Hu, M.Y. and Krush, M.T. (2016), “Social media: influencing customer
satisfaction in b2b sales”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 53, pp. 172-180.
Agnihotri, R., Kothandaraman, P., Kashyap, R. and Singh, R. (2012), “Bringing ‘social’ into sales: the
impact of salespeople’s social media use on service behaviors and value creation”, Journal of
Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 333-348.
Albrecht, C. Seley, A. and Heller, K. (2014), “Outside in: the rise of the inside sales team”, ZS and Reality
Works, available at: www.zs.com/publications/whitepapers/outside-in-the-rise-of-the-inside-
sales-team.aspx (accessed 1 February 2017).
Andzulis, J., Panagopoulos, N.G. and Rapp, A. (2012), “A review of social media and implications for the
sales process”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 305-316.
Arndt, A.D. and Harkins, J. (2013), “A framework for configuring sales support structure”, Journal of
Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 432-443.
Bakker, A.B. and Demerouti, E. (2007), “The job demands-resources model: state of the art”, Journal of
Managerial Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 309-328.
Bellizzi, J.A. and Hasty, R.W. (1998), “Territory assignment decisions and supervising unethical selling
behavior: the effects of obesity and gender as moderated by job-related factors”, Journal of
Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 35-49.
Bonney, F.L. and Williams, B.C. (2009), “From products to solutions: the role of salesperson opportunity
recognition”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43 Nos 7/8, pp. 1032-1052.
Boyle, B.A. (1996), “The importance of the industrial inside sales force: a case study”, Industrial Inside sales
Marketing Management, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 339-348.
force
Churchill, G.A., Jr, Ford, N.M., Hartley, S.W. and Walker, O.C. Jr, (1985), “The determinants of salesperson
performance: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 103-118.
Corbin, J.M. and Strauss, A. (1990), “Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative
criteria”, Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 3-21.
Daim, T.U., Ha, A., Reutiman, S., Hughes, B., Pathak, U., Bynum, W. and Bhatla, A. (2012), “Exploring
the communication breakdown in global virtual teams”, International Journal of Project
1053
Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 199-212.
Darmon, R.Y. (1982), “Identifying profit-producing salesforce members”, Journal of Personal Selling and
Sales Management, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 14-23.
Darmon, R.Y. (1998), “A conceptual scheme and procedure for classifying sales positions”, Journal of
Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 31-46.
Dawes, P.L. and Massey, G.R. (2005), “Antecedents of conflict in marketing’s cross-functional
relationship with sales”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 Nos 11/12, pp. 1327-1344.
Day, G.S. (1994), “The capabilities of market driven organizations”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 4,
pp. 37-52.
Demerouti, E.B., NAchreiner, A.B., Schaufeli, F. and Wilmar, B. (2001), “The job demands-resources
model of burnout”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 3, pp. 499-512.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-550.
Ferrell, L., Gonzalez-Padron, T.L. and Ferrell, O.C. (2010), “An assessment of the use of technology in
the direct selling industry”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 30 No. 2,
pp. 157-165.
Finnegan, D.J. and Currie, W.L. (2010), “A multi-layered approach to CRM implementation: an
integration perspective”, European Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 153-167.
Gellman, L. and Wells, G. (2016), “What’s holding back women in tech?”, The Wall Street Journal,
March 16, available at: www.wsj.com/articles/whats-holding-back-women-in-tech-1458639004
(accessed 2 March 2017).
Gessner, G. and Scott, R.A. Jr, (2009), “Using business intelligence tools to help manage costs and
effectiveness of business-to-business inside-sales programs”, Information Systems Management,
Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 199-208.
Hackman, J.R. and Lawler, E.E. (1971), “Employee reactions to job characteristics”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 55 No. 3, pp. 259-286.
Harris, L.C. (2013), “Service employees and customer phone rage: an empirical analysis”, European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 47 Nos 3/4, pp. 463-484.
Hunter, G.K. and Perreault, W.D. Jr, (2007), “Making sales technology effective”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 71 No. 1, pp. 16-34.
Insidesales.com (2016), “The challenges of the inside sales industry 2016”, AA-ISP and InsideSales.com
Labs, available at: www.insidesales.com/research-paper/top-challenges-inside-sales-industry-
2016/ (accessed 7 June 2017).
Johnson, D.S. and Bharadwaj, S. (2005), “Digitization of selling activity and sales force performance”,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 3-18.
Jussila, J.J., Kärkkäinen, H. and Aramo-Immonen, H. (2014), “Social media utilization in business-to-
business relationships of technology industry firms”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 30,
pp. 606-613.
Karasek, R.A. Jr, (1979), “Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: implications for job
design”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 285-308.
EJM Krogue, K. (2013), “What is inside sales? The definition of inside sales”, Forbes, available at: www.
forbes.com/sites/kenkrogue/2013/02/26/what-is-inside-sales-the-definition-of-inside-sales
54,5 (accessed 26 February).
Krogue, K. (2017), “2017 Sales trend research: inside sales vs. outside sales”, Forbes, available at: www.
forbes.com/sites/kenkrogue/2017/10/03/2017-sales-trend-research-inside-sales-vs-outside-sales
(accessed 3 October).
Kumar, V., Sunder, S. and Leone, R.P. (2014), “Measuring and managing a salesperson’s future value to
1054 the firm”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 51 No. 5, pp. 591-608.
Le Meunier-FitzHugh, K. and Piercy, N.F. (2007), “Exploring collaboration between sales and
marketing”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 Nos 7/8, pp. 939-955.
Lee, J., Kozlenkova, I.V. and Palmatier, R.W. (2015), “Structural marketing: using organizational
structure to achieve marketing objectives”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 43
No. 1, pp. 73-99.
Leong, S., Busch, P.S. and John, D.R. (1989), “Knowledge bases and salesperson effectiveness: a script-
theoretic analysis”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 164-178.
MacDonald, J.B. and Smith, K. (2004), “The effects of technology-mediated communication on industrial
buyer behavior”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 107-116.
McBane, D.A. (1995), “Empathy and the salesperson: a multidimensional perspective”, Psychology and
Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 349-370.
McCracken, G. (1988), The Long Interview, Vol. 13, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Malshe, A. and Sohi, R.S. (2009), “What makes strategy making across the sales-marketing interface
more successful?”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 400-421.
Maltz, E. and Kohli, A.J. (2000), “Reducing marketing’s conflict with other functions: the differential
effects of integrating mechanisms”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28 No. 4,
pp. 479-492.
Mantrala, M.K. and Albers, S. (2012), “Impact of the internet on b2b sales force size and structure”, in
Lilien G.L. and Grewal, R. (Eds), Handbook of B2B Marketing, Edward Elgar Publishing,
Northampton, MA, pp. 539-562.
Marshall, G.W., Moncrief, W.C., Rudd, J.M. and Lee, N. (2012), “Revolution in sales: the impact of social
media and related technology on the selling environment”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales
Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 349-363.
Marshall, G.W., Stamps, M.B. and Moore, J.N. (1998), “Preinterview biases: the impact of race, physical
attractiveness, and sales job type on preinterview impressions of sales job applicants”, Journal of
Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 21-38.
Marshall, J.J. and Vredenburg, H. (1988), “Successfully using telemarketing in industrial sales”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 15-22.
Marshall, J.J. and Vredenburg, H. (1991), “The roles of outside and inside sales representatives: conflict
or cooperation?”, Journal of Direct Marketing, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 8-17.
Martin, S.W. (2013), “The trend that is changing sales”, Harvard Business Review, available at: https://
hbr.org/2013/11/the-trend-that-is-changing-sales
Matsuo, M. and Kusumi, T. (2002), “Salesperson’s procedural knowledge, experience and performance:
an empirical study in Japan”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36 Nos 7/8, pp. 840-854.
Mayer, J.D. and Salovey, P. (1997), “What is emotional intelligence?”, In Salovey, P. and Suiter, D.J.
(Eds), Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence, Basic Books, New York, NY, pp. 3-31.
Moncrief, W.C. (1986), “Selling activity and sales position taxonomies for industrial salesforces”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 261-270.
Moncrief, W.C., Lamb, C.W. Jr. and Dielman, T. (1986), “Developing telemarketing support systems”,
Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 43-49.
Moncrief, W.C., Shipp, S.H., Lamb, C.W., Jr,. and Cravens, D.W. (1989), “Examining the roles of Inside sales
telemarketing in selling strategy”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 9 No.
3, pp. 1-12.
force
Narus, J.A. and Anderson, J.C. (1986), “Industrial distributor selling: the roles of outside and inside
sales”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 55-62.
Oldroyd, J. (2013), “Remote sales trends”, available at www.insidesales.com/images/remote_sales_
trends_09.pdf (accessed 15 May 2019).
1055
Oliver, R.L. and Anderson, E. (1994), “An empirical test of the consequences of behavior- and outcome-
based sales control systems”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 53-67.
Panagopoulos, N.G., Rapp, A.A. and Ogilvie, J.L. (2017), “Salesperson solution involvement and sales
performance: the contingent role of supplier firm and customer-supplier relationship
characteristics”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 81 No. 4, pp. 144-164.
Piercy, N.F. (2010), “Evolution of strategic sales organizations in business-to-business marketing”,
Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 349-359.
Piercy, N.F. and Lane, N. (2003), “Transformation of the traditional salesforce: imperatives for
intelligence, interface and integration”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 19 Nos 5/6, pp.
563-582.
Plouffe, C.R. and Barclay, D.W. (2007), “Salesperson navigation: the intraorganizational dimension of
the sales role”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 528-539.
Plouffe, C.R., Bolander, W., Cote, J.A. and Hochstein, B. (2016), “Does the customer matter most?
Exploring strategic frontline employees’ influence of customers, the internal business team, and
external business partners”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 80 No. 1, pp. 106-123.
Rapp, A., Agnihotri, R. and Baker, T.L. (2015), “Competitive intelligence collection and use by
sales and service representatives: how managers’ recognition and autonomy moderate
individual performance”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 43 No. 3,
pp. 357-374.
Rapp, A., Beitelspacher, L.S., Schillewaert, N. and Baker, T.L. (2012), “The differing effects of
technology on inside vs. outside sales forces to facilitate enhanced customer orientation and
interfunctional coordination”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 7, pp. 929-936.
Robinson, L., Jr, Marshall, G.W. and Stamps, M.B. (2005), “Sales force use of technology: antecedents to
technology acceptance”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58 No. 12, pp. 1623-1631.
Román, S. and Rodríguez, R. (2015), “The influence of sales force technology use on outcome
performance”, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 771-783.
Román, S., Rodríguez, R. and Jaramillo, J.F. (2018), “Are mobile devices a blessing or a curse? Effects of
mobile technology use on salesperson role stress and job satisfaction”, Journal of Business and
Industrial Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 651-664.
Rust, R.T. and Cooil, B. (1994), “Reliability measures for qualitative data: theory and implications”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Rutherford, B.N., Marshall, G.W. and Park, J. (2014), “The moderating effects of gender and inside
versus outside sales role in multifaceted job satisfaction”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67
No. 9, pp. 1850-1856.
Salojärvi, H. and Saarenketo, S. (2013), “The effect of teams on customer knowledge processing, esprit
de corps and account performance in international key account management”, European Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 47 Nos 5/6, pp. 987-1005.
Schmitz, C. (2013), “Group influences of selling teams on industrial salespeople’s cross-selling
behavior”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 55-72.
Schnall, P.L., Landsbergis, P.A. and Baker, D. (1994), “Job strain and cardiovascular disease”, Annual
Review of Public Health, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 381-411.
EJM Sleep, S., Bharadwaj, S. and Lam, S.K. (2015), “Walking a tightrope: the joint impact of customer and
within-firm boundary spanning activities on perceived customer satisfaction and team
54,5 performance”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 472-489.
Sommer, K.L. and Bernieri, F. (2014), “Minimizing the pain and probability of rejection: evidence for
relational distancing and proximity seeking within face-to-face interactions”, Social
Psychological and Personality Science, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 131-139.
Speakman, J.I. and Ryals, L. (2012), “Key account management: the inside selling job”, Journal of
1056 Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 360-369.
Stewart, G.L. (1996), “Reward structure as a moderator of the relationship between extraversion and
sales performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 81 No. 6, pp. 619-627.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J.M. (1997), Grounded Theory in Practice, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks,
CA.
Technopedia (2018), “What is a digital identity? Definition from techopedia”, available at: www.
techopedia.com/definition/23915/digital-identity (accessed 23 May 2018).
Thaichon, P., Surachartkumtonkun, J., Quach, S., Weaven, S. and Palmatier, R.W. (2018), “Hybrid sales
structures in the age of e-commerce”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 38
No. 3, pp. 277-302.
Tolbert, P.S. and Hall, R.H. (2009), Organizations: Structures, Processes, and Outcomes, 10th ed.,
Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Tuli, K.R., Kohli, A.K. and Bharadwaj, S.G. (2007), “Rethinking customer solutions: from product
bundles to relational processes”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 1-17.
Vinchur, A.J., Schippmann, J.S., Switzer, F.S., III,. and Roth, P.L. (1998), “A meta-analytic review of
predictors of job performance for salespeople”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 4,
pp. 586-597.
Virtsonis, N. and Harridge-March, S. (2008), “Website elements in B2B online communications: a case
from the UK print industry”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 699-718.
Weitz, B.A., Sujan, H. and Sujan, M. (1986), “Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behavior: a
framework for improving selling effectiveness”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 174-191.
Woods, S. (2010), Digital Body Language: Deciphering Customer Intentions in an Online World, New
Year Publishing, Danville, CA.
Zibrun, S.M. (1987), “Business-to-business: a value-added service to build opportunity”, Journal of
Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 67-76.
Zoltners, A.A., Sinha, P.K. and Lorimer, S.E. (2013), “The growing power of inside sales”, Harvard
Business Review, available at: https://hbr.org/2013/07/the-growing-power-of-inside-sales.
Zoltners, A.A., Sinha, P.K. and Lorimer, S.E. (2015), “The technology trends that matter to sales teams”,
Harvard Business Review, available at: https://hbr.org/2015/05/the-technology-trends-that-
matter-to-sales-teams
Research stream Representative studies Key findings Contributions of this research

Internal sales Moncrief (1986) Creates a taxonomy of six sales jobs based on 121 Re-examines the roles and capabilities
roles Narus and Anderson sales activities necessary for the inside sales force to Appendix
(1986) Inside sales responsibilities will expand to include communicate with customers in today’s
Zibrun (1987) generating leads and maintaining customer contact technology-driven sales environment
Marshall and Vredenburg The telephone is the “newest” marketing tool and Examines how inside sales capabilities
(1988) has both pitfalls and potential evolve and differ from outside sales
Moncrief et al. (1989) Telemarketing success can be achieved by capabilities
Marshall and Vredenburg developing specific goals, having implementation
(1991) plans, and using dedicated, specialized
Boyle (1996) representatives
Bellizzi and Hasty (1998) Telemarketing sales types can be classified by the
Darmon (1998) activities that they perform
Marshall et al. (1998) Firms that changed the role of the outside sales force
Piercy (2010) and used telemarketing for order taking, product
information, qualifying leads, managing marginal
accounts, and supporting the outside sales force
were the most successful
Inside and outside sales should have similar traits.
Inside sales have a greater impact on customer
satisfaction
Inside sales jobs offset the perception that obese
salespeople are less fit for challenging sales
territories
Classification of sales positions based on time
management, size of information load, and
complexity of information load
There are no pre-interview biases predicated on sales
job type and either race or physical attractiveness.
As a result, it is possible that the overall perception
and prestige of inside sales may be rising
A framework to address roles in the strategic sales
organization, based on intelligence, integration,
internal marketing and infrastructure
(continued)

research on inside
Table AI.
Inside sales

Literature review:
1057
force

sales
 54,5
EJM

1058

Table AI.
Research stream Representative studies Key findings Contributions of this research

Sales Moncrief et al. (1986) Reviews the benefits of telemarketing and explores Examines the changing relationship of the
organizational Piercy and Lane (2003) five specific telemarketing support systems inside sales force with both the outside sales
configurations Gessner and Scott (2009) Evolution of the conventional sales organization force and customers
Speakman and Ryals toward a strategic customer management role by Delineates the benefits and costs of
(2012) leveraging intelligence, managing interfaces and organizational structures of the inside sales
Arndt and Harkins (2013) integrating processes force for the firm, customers and the inside
Schmitz (2013) With higher expenses and uncertainty associated sales force
Zoltners et al. (2013) with the outside sales force, business intelligence
Rutherford et al. (2014) tools can be used to manage inside sales costs
Sleep et al. (2015) Key account managers handle multiple incidents of
Rapp et al. (2015) simultaneous conflict while carrying out their
Thaichon et al. (2018) internal selling duties and conflict episodes require a
combination of behaviors in their management
Four dimensions of sales activities should be
considered when allocating sales activities to
members of the selling center
Sales team norms affect individual salespeople in
cross-selling scenarios
Lower costs increased buyer comfort with
technology, and easy-to-use video technologies are
driving the move to inside sales
For inside salespeople, organizational support
results in higher levels of satisfaction with
supervision
Internal and external boundary spanning have
opposite effects on customer satisfaction and sales
team performance
Individual competitive intelligence has a positive
impact on performance, especially among those who
are service-oriented
Examines the impact of technology on the evolution
of sales organizations and identifies key components
of a successful hybrid sales structure
(continued)
Research stream Representative studies Key findings Contributions of this research

Impact of MacDonald and Smith Sales technology mediated communication have a Examines how technology affects sales
technology on (2004) significant, positive effect on future intentions and roles and the move to inside sales
sales roles Johnson and Bharadwaj are partially mediated by trust and commitment
(2005) Digitization, the use of a website for information and
Hunter and Perreault ordering, improves salesperson effectiveness and
(2007) increases job insecurity concerns
Virtsonis and Harridge- Using sales technology to analyze or communicate
March (2008) information has positive effects on relationship
Ferrell et al. (2010) building
Mantrala and Albers Framework shows how website communications are
(2012) manifested in the online B2B environment
Marshall et al. (2012) New technologies may be equivalent to or a
Rapp et al. (2012) substitute for, face-to-face interactions
Jussila et al. (2014) The internet has empowered buyers to be more
Román and Rodríguez information powered, the buying process to be more
(2015) internet dependent, and the selling process to be
Román et al. (2018) more buyer driven
Organizational buyers often prefer virtual over face-
to-face interactions
A sales force structure must be supported by e-
learning and technological tools to provide the
greatest possible benefit
A significant gap exists between the perceived
potential of social media and social media use with
customers and partners in B2B companies
Sales technology helps salespeople perform better by
modifying their customer-qualification skills and
customer-oriented selling behaviors
During work hours, mobile technology has a positive
effect on job satisfaction. The impact of mobile
technology on role stress is strengthened by
technological capability

Table AI.
Inside sales

1059
force
EJM About the authors
54,5 Stefan Sleep Assistant Professor in Marketing; School of Business, Georgia Gwinnett College; 1000
University Center Lane, Lawrenceville, GA 30043; Phone: (770) 862-5610. Stefan Sleep is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: ssleep@ggc.edu
Andrea L. Dixon Executive Director, center for professional selling and Keller Center for Research;
Frank and Floy Smith Holloway Endowed Professorship in Marketing; Hankamer School of
Business, Baylor University; One Bear Place, Waco, Texas 76798-8007; Phone: (254) 710-1986 | Fax:
1060 (254) 710-1068.
Thomas DeCarlo Professor and Ben S. Weil Endowed Chair of Industrial Distribution; Collat
School of Business, University of Alabama at Birmingham; 1150 10th Ave. South, Birmingham, AL
35294; Phone: (205) 934-8989 | Fax: (205) 975-6510.
Son K. Lam Associate Professor of Marketing, Terry Dean’s Advisory Council Distinguished
Professorship, Terry College of Business, University of Georgia; C328 Benson Hall, Athens, GA
30602-6258; Phone: (706) 542-4531 | Fax: (706) 542 2793.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com