See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/357236546

The Role of Salespeople in Value Co-Creation and Its Impact on Sales

Performance

Article  in  Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing · October 2021

DOI: 10.1080/1051712X.2021.2012079

CITATIONS READS

5 828

3 authors:

Hayam Alnakhli Eddie Inyang

Central Michigan University The College of New Jersey
3 PUBLICATIONS   25 CITATIONS    5 PUBLICATIONS   124 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Omar S Itani
University of Texas at Arlington
36 PUBLICATIONS   1,365 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Can salesperson guilt lead to more satisfied customers? Findings from India View project

The role of manager leadership style in salesperson implementation of sales strategy View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Omar S Itani on 26 December 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wbbm20

The Role of Salespeople in Value Co-Creation and

Its Impact on Sales Performance

Hayam Alnakhli, Aniefre Eddie Inyang & Omar S. Itani

To cite this article: Hayam Alnakhli, Aniefre Eddie Inyang & Omar S. Itani (2021) The Role of
Salespeople in Value Co-Creation and Its Impact on Sales Performance, Journal of Business-to-
Business Marketing, 28:4, 347-367, DOI: 10.1080/1051712X.2021.2012079

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1051712X.2021.2012079

Published online: 21 Dec 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

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

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wbbm20
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING
2021, VOL. 28, NO. 4, 347–367
https://doi.org/10.1080/1051712X.2021.2012079

The Role of Salespeople in Value Co-Creation and Its Impact on Sales Performance
Hayam Alnakhlia, Aniefre Eddie Inyangb, and Omar S. Itanic
a
Department of Marketing and Hospitality, College of Business Administration, Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, Michigan, USA;
b
Department of Marketing and Interdisciplinary Business, School of Business, The College of New Jersey, Ewing, New Jersey, USA; cDepartment
of Marketing Adnan Kassar School of Business, Lebanese American University, Beirut, Lebanon

ABSTRACT Keywords
Purpose: This paper aims to examine salesperson skills, including listening, communication, and Value Co-Creation;
adaptive selling, that can enable value co-creation with customers and increase sales performance, Salespeople; Service-
while taking into consideration the contingent role of salesperson relationship-enhancing activities. Dominant Logic; Sales
Methodology: Survey and objective sales performance data were collected from 201 B2B sales­ Performance
people in the industrial goods industry. The hypotheses were tested using PLS-SEM.
Findings: The results show adaptive selling, listening, and communication of salespeople positively
impact the behaviors of salespeople to co-create value with customers. The results show that when
salespeople co-create value with customers, they will have a positive effect on sales performance.
Results show how value co-creation mediates the effects of listening and adaptive selling on sales
performance.
Research Implications: Salespeople need to effectively listen to their customers to provide needed
solutions by jointly working with them to co-create value. Similarly, a salesperson’s communication
and adaptive selling skills have collective impacts that positively contribute to the value co-creation
process. Results supplement previous findings in the literature by showing value co-creation holds
a positive effect on sales performance at the micro salesperson level. The results offer additional
support to the ongoing dialog on the role of a salesperson as a value co-creator.
Practical Implications: This study has identified several variables that engender successful co-
creation by salespeople in B2B sales contexts. Findings demonstrate that salespeople who can
adapt their selling approach, are good listeners, and can effectively communicate with customers
can engender the value co-creation process with customers. The findings serve as a base to create
professional guidelines about the skills and capabilities salespeople need to successfully execute
a value co-creation process.
Originality/Value: The study adds to the literature on value co-creation by highlighting three
factors that can enhance the value co-creation process at the level of salespeople leading to better
sales outcomes. This research adds the existing literature on the role of value co-creation in sales by
empirically examining the relationship between value co-creation and sales performance at the
salesperson level.

Introduction
In today’s competitive market environment, sales­
people everywhere strive to differentiate themselves,
the products, and services they sell to gain
a competitive advantage. Salespeople, who can
create competitive differentiation when presenting
solutions to prospective customers, are more suc­
cessful in building customer relationships and win­
ning new business. However, many salespeople are
not adept at differentiating themselves and the pro­
ducts they sell. Moreover, the lack of the ability to
listen to customers (Itani, Goad, and Jaramillo 2019)
and create and communicate differentiation raises
the challenges faced by salespeople (Richardson
2019). A study by CSO Insights found that over
forty percent of sales organizations viewed their
competencies around creating competitive differen­
tiation as needing improvement (CSO Insights
2018). One way organizations can achieve competi­
tive differentiation is through value co-creation (de
Oliveira and Cortimiglia 2017; Sinkovics,
Kuivalainen, and Roath 2018). Firms who co-create
value with customers gain a competitive advantage
due to the positive impacts of value co-creation on
customer satisfaction and relationship building
(Cossío-Silva et al. 2016; Navarro, Llinares, and

CONTACT Hayam Alnakhli Alnak1h@cmich.edu Department of Marketing and Hospitality, College of Business Administration, Central Michigan
University 150 E. Bellows, Mount Pleasant, Michigan 48859, USA
© 2021 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
348 H. ALNAKHLI ET AL.
Garzon 2016). The key to effective implementation
of value co-creation for firms and their salespeople is
to move from a product-focused mind-set to a value
co-creation approach that requires the customers to
be involved in solution development (Kothmaki and
Partanen 2016; Plouffe et al. 2020). Hence, their
salesforce’s value co-creation can help firms create
competitive differentiation and move away from
price-based competition.
In a selling context, salespeople can create differ­
entiation by co-creating value with prospective cus­
tomers. Salespeople as boundary spanners are key
actors in facilitating value co-creation with custo­
mers, as they engender value co-creation through
their skills and abilities. The importance of value
co-creation lies in customers’ emerging need to
participate in the value creation process and thus
maximize their value-in-use (Grönroos and Voima
2013). The need for salespeople to co-create value
with customers was further highlighted in a study
by CSO Insights, which found that many B2B
buyers are looking for salespeople who understand
their business and can offer them unique insights
and perspectives (CSO Insights 2018). Hence, when
salespeople collaborate with customers to develop
unique and tailored solutions, they are better posi­
tioned to differentiate themselves from
competitors.
Although value co-creation is one way firms can
gain competitive advantage, very little empirical
research in the extant literature has examined the
drivers and outcomes of value co-creation at the
salesperson level (see Appendix A). Most prior
research on value co-creation at the salesperson
level has been conceptual (Baumann and Le
Meunier-fitzhugh 2014; Hartmann, Wieland, and
Vargo 2018; Ulaga and Kohli 2018) or qualitative
(Plouffe et al. 2020; Baumann, Le Meunier-fitzhugh,
and Wilson 2017; Baumann and Le Meunier-
FitzHugh 2015). At the firm level, prior studies
have found a positive association between value co-
creation and performance (Sinkovics, Kuivalainen,
and Roath 2018; Zaborek and Mazur 2019), but
there is a paucity of research exploring the perfor­
mance outcomes of value co-creation at the micro
salesperson level. This oversight is noteworthy
because salespeople, as boundary spanners, are
often at the forefront of interacting with customers.
Value co-creation is dependent on buyer-seller
interaction (Prahalad and Ramaswamy 2004), and
salespeople play a critical role in interacting directly
with customers and managing their relationships
with sellers. Hence, examining the performance out­
comes of value co-creation at the individual level can
provide a more granular view of the micro-level
value co-creation process.
To address this gap in the literature, we first
determine antecedents to effective value co-creation
by salespeople. Prior research has suggested personal
skills, dialogue, and shared goals as enablers of value
co-creation between salespeople and customers
(Baumann and LeMeunier-FitzHugh 2015). This
research examines how salesperson adaptive selling,
listening, and communication skills enable value co-
creation with customers. Next, we look at the per­
formance impact of value co-creation by salespeople
by examining the effect of value co-creation on sales
quota achieved by the salesperson, considering the
contingent role of relationship-enhancing activities
performed by salespeople.
This research adds to the existing sales literature
in three ways. First, we empirically examine three
factors that trigger salesperson value co-creation
with customers. Previous research has demon­
strated value co-creation as a source of competitive
advantage (Cossío-Silva et al. 2016), and this study
will illustrate how salespeople can be effective in co-
creating value with customers to support company
overall value co-creation initiatives and gain
a competitive advantage. Second, we examine the
sales performance outcomes of value co-creation
when implemented by salespeople. With salespeo­
ple increasingly facing competitive pressure when
selling solutions to prospective buyers, value co-
creation is an approach that can allow for compe­
titive differentiation, thereby allowing salespeople
to improve their performance. Finally, we look at
how activities that focus on strengthening ongoing
customer relationships can enhance the effects of
value co-creation on salesperson performance.
Theoretical background
The notion of value co-creation is grounded in and
consistent with Service-Dominant Logic Theory
(hereafter referred to as SDL). SDL argues that
marketing has evolved from a focus on goods and
the exchange of tangible resources to a focus on

intangible resources, relationships, and value co-
creation (Vargo and Lusch 2004). According to
SDL, operant resources, which are referred to as
the application of knowledge, skills, and abilities,
are the fundamental source of competitive advan­
tage (Vargo and Lusch 2008, 2016). Another foun­
dational premise of SDL is ” . . . the customer is
always a co-creator of value” (Vargo and Lusch
2008, 7). Hence, when salespeople use their knowl­
edge, skills, and abilities to co-create value with
customers by involving them in solution develop­
ment, they are likely to give their firm a competitive
advantage. SDL theory also argues that the value
co-creation process is interactional (Grönroos and
Voima 2013). In other words, value co-creation is
facilitated through the interactions between custo­
mers and salespeople.
Value co-creation exists in interactive system-
environments that are based on relational activities
between customers and sellers. Therefore, value co-
creation requires relational and interactional
dynamics to drive business outcomes (Grönroos
2009; Ramaswamy and Ozcan 2018). In general,
value co-creation is the outcome of interactive pro­
cesses and continuous interactions among salespeo­
ple and customers (Delpechitre, Beeler-Connelly,
and Chaker 2018). Customer participation in co-
creating value can take various forms. For instance,
customers can have an active role through sharing
their knowledge, experience, and information with
the organization (Ordanini and Pasini 2008).
Customers also can act as the source of competence,
in which they define an important value for them­
selves and co-create it (Prahalad and Ramaswamy
2000). Additionally, customers can play a critical
role in quality control and marketing. As such, cus­
tomers can be a promoter of a product/service pro­
vider and become a part of a customer-driven
community by advocacy and word of mouth (Ida
2017).
While customers can play the role of value co-
creators (Vargo and Lusch 2004), the challenge
firms face is developing an organizational culture
of involving customers in solution development,
particularly having salespeople who encourage and
support customers as value co-creators. We argue
that salespeople play an essential role in selling
firms’ value co-creation processes with customers.
When salespeople are provided the opportunity to
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING 349
effectively co-create value with customers, they can
give themselves and their firms a competitive
advantage and increase sales outcomes.
SDL has evolved to incorporate a service ecosys­
tem perspective (Vargo and Lusch 2016). This per­
spective adopts a more holistic view of service
exchange and value co-creation to include an insti­
tutional and organizational approach (Vargo and
Lusch 2016) that goes beyond the individual, dya­
dic approach to value co-creation. Based on SDL,
Hartmann, Wieland, and Vargo (2018) argue that
selling has evolved beyond individual salespeople
to incorporate various actors who interact to co-
create value through aligning institutional arrange­
ments and optimized relationships. Hence,
although salespeople are the primary touchpoints
for co-creating value with customers, they do not
do so by themselves but require the cooperation of
others within their organizations and the use of
resources within their firms to be able to co-
create value with customers effectively. Therefore,
we adopt Grönroos’s (2012, 1523) conceptualiza­
tion of value co-creation, which defines value co-
creation as ” . . . joint collaborative activities by
parties involved in direct interactions, aiming to
contribute to the value that emerges for one or
both parties”. Thus, salespeople in their role as
boundary spanners leverage resources within
their firms, along with their knowledge, skills,
and abilities (e.g., adaptive selling, listening, and
communication) to enhance value co-creation with
customers. The model developed and tested is
demonstrated in Figure 1.
Model development
Adaptive selling
Adaptive selling is defined as ”the altering of sales
behaviors during a customer interaction or across
customer interactions based on perceived informa­
tion about the nature of the selling situation”
(Weitz, Sujan, and Sujan 1986, 175). It has been
known for its vital role in driving sales relational
and revenue outcomes (Itani, Goad, and Jaramillo
2019; Verbeke, Dietz, and Verwaal 2011). Adaptive
selling includes modifying selling tactics and
arrangements to satisfy customers’ specific needs
(Spiro and Weitz 1990). Accordingly, customers
350 H. ALNAKHLI ET AL.
Figure 1. Model
form positive opinions about salespeople who fol­
low an adaptive selling approach, because they
know those salespeople can better understand
them and can work with them to provide modified
solutions to help them solve their specific problems
and meet their unique needs (Chen and Jaramillo
2014; Román and Iacobucci 2010). In a B2B context
where relationship selling is needed, adaptive sell­
ing is critical to respond to customers’ specific
needs and co-create value with them.
Adaptive selling is vital for salespeople to build
and maintain long-term relational exchanges with
customers (Paparoidamis and Guenzi 2009; Rich
and Smith 2000). A salesperson engaging in adap­
tive selling uses learned behaviors, including: gath­
ering information, communication processes, and
developing solutions with customers (Eckert 2006).
Salespeople use the information they gather before
and during their interaction with customers to
adapt their presentations and selling approaches
in line with individual customers’ exact needs and
concerns (Weitz, Sujan, and Sujan 1986; Park et al.
2010). A salesperson who follows an adaptive sell­
ing approach when interacting with customers
speaks the customers’ language (Román and
Iacobucci 2010).
To this end, adaptation is associated with value
co-creation processes by focusing on buyers’ needs
(Preikschas et al. 2017). Thus, we argue that sales­
people who employ an adaptive selling approach
when with their customers are more likely to work
with them to co-develop specific solutions to their
problems and thus co-create value. Moreover,
salespeople who use adaptive selling are more
aware and knowledgeable about the differences
between customers’ needs and can use what they
know to co-create value with them. Based on the
aforementioned, we postulate the following
relationship:
H1: Salesperson adaptive selling has a positive effect
on salesperson value co-creation.
Listening
In sales, effective listening is essential for success
in sales (Castleberry and Shepherd 1993; Marshall,
Goebel, and Moncrief 2003), whereas its absence
increases the probability of failure of the salesper­
son (Ingram, Schwepker, and Hutson 1992) due to
the lack of common understanding with customers
(Pullins et al. 2017). Poor listening skills also hin­
der exchanges with customers and create interper­
sonal barriers between a salesperson and
customers (Itani, Goad, and Jaramillo 2019).
Salesperson listening is the cognitive process of
actively and effectively sensing or interpreting,
evaluating, and responding to customers’ verbal
and non-verbal cues and messages (Castleberry
and Shepherd 1993; Comer and Drollinger 1999;

Ramsey and Sohi 1997). By listening effectively to
customers, salespeople devote their efforts to
satisfy customers’ exact needs, such as granting
customers full attention, probing for details, work­
ing hard to understand customers’ exact needs,
and displaying enthusiasm when responding to
customers (Ramsey and Sohi 1997).
Listening allows a salesperson to ”mind read”
their customers (Itani, Goad, and Jaramillo 2019),
which is vital to precisely comprehend customer
meanings and needs. For salespeople, listening is ”a
basic interpersonal skill that needs to be mastered in
sales today.” (Pullins et al. 2017, 24). Salespeople
who listen effectively to customers can better under­
stand their needs and will be able to be ”in sync with
them” (Pryor, Malshe, and Paradise 2013, 193). As
good listeners, salespeople can provide value-added
services (Janakiraman et al. 2019) and co-create
value with customers. According to Itani, Goad,
and Jaramillo (2019, 128), ”effective listening can
help salespeople co-create value with customers,”
especially in industrial settings. Listening to custo­
mers supports salespeople altering their selling to
best-fit customers’ needs, leading to superior rela­
tional and sales performance (Rich and Smith 2000).
Salespeople who listen to customers gain their
respect, leading to mutual exchange (Ramsey and
Sohi 1997). Moreover, they participate in value-
expressive behaviors to show their interest in their
customers’ welfare by sensing and evaluating cus­
tomers’ verbal cues and nonverbal ones, and then
responding to customers’ needs (Itani, Goad, and
Jaramillo 2019). According to Hinterhuber (2017),
listening is a single cause of salespeople’s value
quantification capabilities. Salespeople who listen
well to customers will creatively provide solutions
to customers and will co-create value with them.
The same salespeople are likely to deliver higher
quality service (Janakiraman et al. 2019) and engage
in extra-role behaviors by going above and beyond
the ‘call of duty’ (Anaza, Inyang, and Saavedra
2018).
In a business to business context, relational selling
requires sales representatives to act as consultants
with customers and listen to them carefully to create
value-added solutions in response to their problems
(Itani, Goad, and Jaramillo 2019). From an SDL
perspective, listening is an operant resource that
helps salespeople gather important information and
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING 351
knowledge and sense insights required to propose
integrative solutions. Listening helps salespeople
understand the changing needs of their customers
and facilitates their involvement in product develop­
ment efforts. Listening also helps salespeople learn
about customers’ emerging needs and experience
with new product prototypes. Interpersonal skills,
such as listening, enable the achievement of value
co-creation between the customer and the salesper­
son (Baumann and Le Meunier-fitzhugh 2014).
Based on the above discussion, we argue that listen­
ing is an important antecedent for a salesperson to
engage in value co-creation with customers. Thus,
we hypothesize the following:
H2: Salesperson listening has a positive effect on
salesperson value co-creation.
Communication
Communication is a crucial activity of industrial
salespeople in their exchange with buyers
(Agnihotri et al. 2017; Dwyer, Schurr, and Oh
1987; Williams, Spiro, and Fine 1990). In sales,
communication includes the formal and informal
exchange of meaningful and timely information
between a salesperson and his/her and customers
(Sin et al. 2005). Salesperson communication pro­
vides customers with a responsive source of infor­
mation that is often needed to purchase complex
products and solutions (Agnihotri et al. 2016).
Further, salesperson communication is essential
because it enables customers to engage in sales
organizations’ co-creation efforts. In the current
study, we focus on the frequency and depth of the
communication exchange between salespeople and
customers. The communication construct captures
the persistence and follow-up of salespeople in try­
ing to understand customers’ exact needs by meet­
ing with them regularly to discuss market changes
and spending all the time needed to provide custo­
mers ample opportunities to work with them in
developing plans for future work.
In business relationships, communication can
achieve long-term objectives by aligning the goals
of participating parties, resolving conflicts, reducing
ambiguity, limiting the possibilities of opportunism,
increasing commitment, and enhancing customer
satisfaction and the overall relationship (e.g.,
352 H. ALNAKHLI ET AL.
Agnihotri, Rapp, and Trainor 2009; Morgan and
Hunt 1994; Palmatier et al. 2013; Parasuraman
1998; Rutherford, Anaza, and Phillips 2012;
Sarmento, Simões, and Farhangmehr 2015; Yen,
Barnes, and Wang 2011; Zhou et al. 2015).
Communication holds favorable effects on the
value chain (Hossain and Chonko 2018) and posi­
tively impacts customer perceived value (Corsaro
and Snehota 2010; Pinnington and Scanlon 2009).
Communication also enhances customer satisfac­
tion because of increased customer value generated
from higher levels of information communication
(Itani, Jaramillo, and Paesbrugghe 2020). Frequent
communication between salespeople and their
customers facilitates a deeper understanding of
customers’ needs. These collective effects of com­
munication contribute to the value co-creation
process.
Buyers are more likely to engage in co-creation
with sellers when they have salespeople who meet
and interact with them regularly, and spend time
assessing their future needs and plan responses for
a changing business environment. Communication
enhances vividness and cuts the psychological dis­
tance between salespeople and customers, leading to
an enduring relationship (Hossain and Chonko
2018). Communication is a significant component
of relationship orientation (Sin et al. 2005) as it
builds cooperation and trust in partnerships
(Anderson and Narus 1990). The value co-creation
process between salespeople and customers can be
facilitated through formal meetings, spending more
time with customers to understand their exact
needs, and periodically planning responses to
changes and opportunities in the market. The reg­
ular meetings conducted to discuss market trends
and developments allow salespeople to work
together with customers to take advantage of
changes occurring in the marketplace. Moreover,
the depth of the communication taking place and
the persistence of salespeople to assess the exact
future needs of customers, making it easier to co-
create value. In addition, communication allows
salespeople to understand, discuss, and adapt to
the changes customers ask for as a way to increase
their benefits.
In the customers-salesperson relationship, com­
munication facilitates the information flow pro­
cesses and mutual understanding between the
dyad (Itani, Krush, Agnihotri, Trainor 2020).
Frequent meetings between the salesperson and
the customer to assess the customer’s future
needs, discuss market developments, and plan
responses to changes taking place enables the
value co-creation process. Hence, we argue that
salesperson communication with buyers can enrich
value co-creation by better involvement of custo­
mers in co-creation, such as new product develop­
ment and prototype testing. Accordingly, we
hypothesize the following:
H3: Salesperson communication has a positive
effect on salesperson value co-creation
Effect of value co-creation on sales performance
Salespeople as boundary spanners have a unique
advantage point to translate back the outcomes of
value co-creation with customers. Specifically,
salespeople’s participation in co-creation pro­
cesses to jointly develop products and solutions
with customers is more likely to motivate custo­
mers to make their purchase decision, leading
salespeople to achieve their sales targets. In other
words, value co-creation efforts can increase cus­
tomer conversion and sales closing rates. To
understand the relationship between seller value
creation and firm sales performance, Sullivan,
Peterson, and Krishnan (2012) found positive
effects of value creation on different sales perfor­
mance metrics, such as new account acquisition,
conversion rate, close rates retention, and sales
revenue.
Since value co-creation requires participation
and contribution from customers (Auh et al.
2019), and according to SDL, customers are always
co-creators of value (Vargo and Lusch 2004, 2008),
we posit when salespeople collaborate with custo­
mers to develop unique, tailored solutions, custo­
mers are likely to appreciate the personalized
approach that welcomes their involvement.
Furthermore, customers are likely to purchase the
jointly developed solution because they had a role
in designing the solution. When customers are
involved in solution development, they are likely
to take ownership of and assume responsibility for
the co-created solution. This makes the decision to
purchase the co-created solution from the

salesperson much easier on the part of the customer
since they were involved in its development. Thus,
the following effect is hypothesized:
H4: Salesperson value co-creation has a positive
effect on salesperson sales performance.
The moderating effect of salesperson relationship–
Enhancement activities
The co-creation of value is dependent on the inter­
actions between two or more parties (Prahalad and
Ramaswamy 2004). To a large extent, these inter­
actions are between customers and salespeople who
act as consultants to customers while representing
the organization. Value co-creation is supported by
active participation and collaboration of customers
and sellers to thoroughly understand customers’
existing problems and work with them to develop
the best appropriate solutions (Franklin and
Marshall 2019). Liinamaa et al. (2016) explain that
for selling firms to have a successful co-creation
process, they must motivate customer participa­
tion. Since salespeople are the boundary spanners
in organizations and work closely with customers,
salespeople are often best suited to perform the role
of relationship enhancer–manager (Crosby, Evans,
and Cowles 1990). Thus, we suggest that for a better
co-creation process that leads to increased sales
performance, relational maintenance strategies,
such as salesperson relationship-enhancement
activities are in place.
Relationship-enhancing activities refer to the
salesperson’s resources, behaviors, and efforts to
strengthen relationships with buyers (Crosby,
Evans, and Cowles 1990). Relationship-enhancing
activities may include social interaction in business
and non-business settings, activities such as sharing
sensitive information regarding the industry and
the marketplace, adaptive policies and procedures,
and other initiatives and efforts that salespeople can
exert to enhance their relationships with customers
(Palmatier, Scheer, Steenkamp 2007).
Relationship–enhancing activities are utilized to
alter indifferent buyers into becoming committed
(Berry 1995, 236) by building and nurturing the
bonds selling firms, and their salespeople have
with buyers (De Wulf, Odekerken-Schröder, and
Iacobucci 2001).
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING 353
To illustrate, buyers often face considerable
challenges and uncertainty due to various factors
such as product/service complexity and lack of
familiarity. Hence, salespeople frequently engage
in specific actions to improve their customers’
situation, solve problems, proactively address
issues and concerns, and take the necessary risks
to help and exceed customer expectations (Amyx,
Bhuian, and Shows 2016). Through relationship-
enhancing activities, salesperson builds quality
relationships with customers, thus being more
able to facilitate the value co-creation process and
find solutions with customers in a way that is
superior to competitors.
Relationship-enhancing activities focus on
improving the salesperson-customer relationship
(Crosby, Evans, and Cowles 1990). These activ­
ities are fruitful in various ways; for example,
they may help convert highly qualified potential
customers into business partners (De Wulf,
Odekerken-Schröder, and Iacobucci 2001).
Relationship-enhancing activities can also foster
assurance and trust between both parties, thereby
facilitating the value co-creation process. Blocker
et al. (2012) offered an integrative framework on
sales force value creation with customers, in
which they explain how relationship dynamics,
including activities of salespeople, can moderate
the effects of value co-creation. In their boundary
spanning role, salespeople can support the value
co-creation processes by nurturing relationships
with customers based on activities, such as pro­
viding customers with special reports or informa­
tion, financial benefits and incentives, and
creating special policies and procedures that suit
their customers (Palmatier, Scheer, and
Steenkamp 2007).
With the increase in business sophistication,
”salespeople by necessity must engage in more
active relational processes to co-create value with
customers and satisfy both their expressed and
latent needs.” (Blocker et al. 2012, 19). This study
argues that value co-creation is better executed and
can lead to higher performance when customers
and salespeople are in quality and professional
relationships driven by salesperson relationship-
enhancing activities. Based on the above discussion,
we argue that relationship-enhancement activities
will strengthen ongoing customer relationships and
354 H. ALNAKHLI ET AL.
enhance the effects of value co-creation on sales­
person performance. Thus, we hypothesize the
following:
H5: Salesperson relationship-enhancement activ­
ities strengthen the positive effect of value co-
creation on salesperson sales performance.
Mediating role of value co-creation between
adaptive selling, listening, communication, and
salesperson performance
Although prior research has shown a direct effect of
adaptive selling, listening, and communication on
sales performance (Dion and Notarantonio 1992;
Itani, Goad, and Jaramillo 2019), the underlying
mechanism through which these variables lead to
sales performance warrants further exploration.
Payne et al. (2009) argue that the value creation
process involves two parties: sellers and customers
to create value. Salespeople who represent these sup­
pliers are expected to acquire specific skills to
achieve sales performance goals. As we previously
demonstrated, the key skills required while interact­
ing and engaging with customers are being adapta­
ble, effective listening, and communication skills.
A salesperson who engages in adaptive selling is
more likely to build long-lasting bonds with customers
and increase their selling effectiveness (Park and Deitz
2006). According to Verbeke, Dietz, and Verwaal
(2011), adaptive selling is the second most important
salesperson sales performance driver. Adaptive selling
helps salespeople achieve higher performance levels by
adjusting their sales approach to ensure customer
involvement (Jaramillo et al. 2007).
Sales research shows that listening is an essential
skill for salespeople since it can build more trusting
relationships with customers and improve sales
outcomes (Aggarwal et al. 2005). Specifically, lis­
tening helps salespeople collect important informa­
tion about customers’ specific needs, which then
facilitates the development and delivery of practical
solutions by salespeople (Drollinger and Comer
2013). Therefore, listening promotes the formation
and sustainability of valuable relationships with
customers (Castleberry, Shepherd, and Ridnour
1999; Drollinger and Comer 2013). As listening is
key to dialogue, and dialogue is a crucial compo­
nent of value co-creation with customers
(Baumann and LeMeunier-FitzHugh 2015), listen­
ing enables value co-creation, which in turn
improves salesperson performance.
During sales interaction, an exchange is usually
originated, sustained, and ended on a salesperson-to
-customer basis. During this exchange, the salesper­
son’s primary task is to communicate with custo­
mers (Dion and Notarantonio 1992). Salespeople
are known as boundary spanners who communicate
with the various stakeholders of the organization.
For that, all sales efforts are of no benefit if sales­
people are incapable of communicating with custo­
mers to encourage customers to share information.
Therefore, effective communication is of paramount
importance. When salespeople maintain efficacious
communication skills, salespeople’s knowledge
increases, leading to repeated purchases and refer­
rals (Baumann and Meunier-fitzhugh 2015). Based
on Woodruff and Flint (2006), customers have
a critical role as they deliberately and energetically
involve themselves in communal value co-creation.
In that regard, this study advances the understand­
ing of value co-creation’s mediating role by demon­
strating that value co-creation is one underlying
process through which salesperson skills and beha­
viors lead to salesperson performance. Accordingly,
we hypothesize the following:
H6 a: Value co-creation mediates the relationship
between adaptive selling and salesperson
performance.
H6 b: Value co-creation mediates the relationship
between listening and salesperson performance
H6 c: Value co-creation mediates the relationship
between communication and salesperson
performance.
Methodolgy
Sample and data collection
To test our hypothesized model, we surveyed sales­
people working for a Fortune 500 company operat­
ing in the industrial goods industry. This sampling
frame was appropriate for studying the drivers and
consequences of value co-creation, as salespeople in
the focal company are expected to develop tailored

solutions with customers and build ongoing rela­
tionships with them. A regional sales director of the
firm provided a list of 265 salespeople working for
the firm based on a convenience sampling
approach. An online survey link was sent via
e-mail to the provided list of 265 salespeople. Out
of the 265 salespeople who received the e-mail, 201
salespeople finished the survey (75.8% response
rate). Management provided objective sales perfor­
mance data for the salespeople who participated in
the research study. Objective sales performance
data were then matched with data reported from
salespeople.
Salespeople who completed the survey had an
average tenure with the company of 11.8 years,
and an average of 18.9 years of sales experience.
The salespeople’s mean age was 47.1 years, 87%
were men, and 83.6% had a bachelor’s degree or
higher. Participants reported spending an average
of 68.8% of the weekly time interacting with exist­
ing customers, and 18.6% of their weekly time pro­
specting for new customers.
Measures
The measures used to capture the data needed for
this study were adapted from previous studies.
Adaptive selling was measured using a five-item
shortened measure developed by Robinson et al.
(2002) [Exemplar item: “I like to experiment with
different sales approaches”]. Communication was
captured using three-item measure adapted from
Le Meunier-fitzhugh and Piercy (2007)[Exemplar
item: “Salespeople spend time with customers asses­
sing their future needs”]. To measure salesperson
listening behaviors, a multi-dimensional scale
developed by Ramsey and Sohi (1997) was used.
The scale consists of three dimensions; sensing (4
items) [Exemplar item: I keep firm eye contact],
evaluating (5 items) [Exemplar item: “I do not inter­
rupt the customer”], and responding (4 items)
[Exemplar item: “I offer relevant information to
questions asked by the customer”]. Value co-
creation was measured using six items based on
the research of Ettlie and Reza (1992) and Walter,
Ritter, and Gemünden (2001) [Exemplar item: “We
engage in the joint development of production pro­
cesses with customers”]. Relationship-enhancing
activities construct was captured using three items
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING 355
adapted from Palmatier, Scheer, and Steenkamp
(2007) [Exemplar item: “My customers often receive
special treatment or status”]. All constructs, with
the exception of salesperson performance, were
measured on a seven-point-agreement Likert-type
scale (1: strongly disagree to 7: strongly agree).
Salesperson performance was measured using
objective performance data provided by the firm.
The performance data was the year-to-date percent
of quota achievement for each salesperson in the
sample. The performance data included salesperson
quota achievement over a seven-month period, and
the data were averaged over the seven months to
yield year-to-date quota achievement. Results were
provided in terms of percentages, not dollar
amounts. When objective data is measured along
with reflectively measured constructs, the possibi­
lity of common method bias (CMB) is reduced
(Johnson, Friend, and Horn 2014). Salesperson
age, gender, and sales experience were included in
the model as covariates to control of their effects on
value co-creation behavior and sales performance
(e.g., Alnakhli et al. 2020; Gabler, Agnihotri, and
Itani 2017).
Measurement model
To assess the reliability and convergent and discri­
minant validity of the constructs in the model,
various criteria were used. First, indicator loadings
were examined to determine if they surpassed the
recommended threshold of 0.70 for all indicators
loading on their respective constructs (Hair et al.
2019). Most indicators loaded on their respective
constructs and exceeded 0.70, with the exception of
a few items (see Appendix B). Two items were
dropped from the salesperson listening scale due
to low loadings. Items with loadings between 0.40
and 0.70 should be dropped if dropping them
improves composite reliability (Hair et al. 2016).
Five items in the model had loadings between 0.40
and 0.70 and were retained as their removal had
a negligible impact on improving composite
reliability.
Composite reliability for all reflectively mea­
sured constructs exceeded the recommended
threshold of 0.70, thus granting evidence of the
constructs’ internal consistency reliability (Hair
et al. 2019). Next, convergent validity was assessed
356 H. ALNAKHLI ET AL.

using average variance extracted (AVE). The AVE
for all constructs in the model was above 0.50,
demonstrating convergent validity for all measures
(Hair et al. 2019). Discriminant validity was
assessed using two methods. First, the AVE for
each factor surpassed all the squared correlations
between the said factor and other factors in the
study (Fornell and Larcker 1981), providing evi­
dence of discriminant validity.
Additionally, discriminant validity was assessed
using the HTMT ratio. The HTMT ratios for all
reflectively measured constructs were below 0.85,
providing additional evidence of discriminant
validity (Henseler, Ringle, and Sarstedt 2015). In
the model, collinearity was not an issue as the
variance inflation factors (VIF) for all constructs
were below 3 (range from 1.03 to 2.15) (Hair et al.
2019). Table 1 lists the correlations, descriptive
statistics, square roots of AVE, and reliability of
the constructs.
Structural model
To test the hypotheses, partial least squares-
structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was uti­
lized. Results are summarized in Table 2. PLS-SEM
is an appropriate methodology to use in this study,
as this research’s objective is focused on prediction,
and the data has a non-normal distribution (Hair
et al. 2019). PLS-SEM analysis was conducted using
SmartPLS (version 3.3.2) (Ringle, Wende, and
Becker 2015). Listening was operationalized as
a second-order factor comprising three first-order
dimensions: “sensing, evaluating, and responding.”
A two-stage procedure was utilized to model
the second-order construct of listening. In the first
stage, the reflective items for sensing, evaluating,
and responding were used to obtain latent variable
scores for the three first-order constructs. In the 2nd
stage, the latent variable scores of sensing, evaluat­
ing, and responding were used as indicators of
listening in the model. As listening and communi­
cation are strongly related to adaptive selling
(Boorom, Goolsby, and Ramsey 1998; Castleberry
and Shepherd 1993), we included two non-
hypothesized paths from listening and communica­
tion to adaptive selling to control for their effects on
the adaptive selling-value co-creation relationship.
Also, CMB is not a factor in the model due to the
multisource nature of the data used in the analysis
(Johnson, Friend, and Horn 2014).
The hypothesized and non-hypothesized rela­
tionships were tested using a bootstrapping proce­
dure with SmartPLS 3.3.2. Using 5000 bootstrap
samples, parameter estimates were obtained for
path coefficients, standard deviation, t-statistics,
and p-values for the various relationships in the
model (see Table 2). The PLS-SEM analysis results
show that when salespeople increase their use of
adaptive selling with their customers, they are more
likely to enhance the value co-creation process they
have with customers, in support of H1 (β = 0.21,
p = .002). Further, the results demonstrate that
salesperson listening is positively linked to value
co-creation (β = 0.17 p = .017), supporting H2. As
hypothesized in H3, salesperson communication
drives value co-creation with customers (β = 0.16,
p = .039), in support of H3. Next, H4 evaluated the
impact of value co-creation on sales performance.
Findings show that salesperson value co-creation

Table 1. Correlation matrix.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. Adaptive Selling .86
2. Listening .47** .86 -
3. Communication .33* .33** .87
4.Value Co-Creation .35* .33** .31* .80
5. Sales Performance .09 .10 .07 .18* 1
6. Relationship-Enhancing Activities .04 −.05 .00 .13* −.02 .74
7. Age −.08 −.03 −.18* .18* −.03 −.02 1
8 Gender .06 .00 −.01 .06 −.01 .02 −.10* 1
9. Sales Experience −.02 −.02 −.19* −.17* .04 −.03 .72** −.13* 1
Mean 6.64 6.04 5.01 5.42 110 3.42 47.1 - 18.9
Standard Deviation 0.44 0.50 1.12 0.89 36.1 1.11 10.6 - 10.0
Composite Reliability .92 .90 .91 .91 - .72 - - -
Cronbach’s Alpha .88 .83 .85 .88 - .72 - - -
Average Variance Extracted (AVE) .73 .75 .76 .64 1 .55 1 1 1
*Correlations significant at p ≤ 0.05; ** Correlations significant at p ≤ 0.01; Square roots of average variance extracted show on diagonal.
 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING 357

Table 2. PLS results.

Relationship Path coefficient Standard Deviation T-statistic P-value Conclusion
Direct Effects
AS→VCC 0.21 0.074 2.809 0.002 H1 supported
List→VCC 0.17 0.08 2.12 0.016 H2 supported
Comm→VCC 0.16 0.09 1.76 0.039 H3 supported
VCC→Perf 0.19 0.068 2.70 0.003 H4 supported
AS→Perf 0.003 0.089 0.037 0.484 n/a
List→Perf 0.029 0.10 0.29 0.39 n/a
Comm→Perf 0.02 0.08 0.22 0.41 n/a
REA→Perf −0.04 0.11 0.41 0.34 n/a
Control variable paths
Age→Perf −0.11 0.078 1.434 0.075 n/a
Age→VCC −0.079 0.095 0.827 0.204 n/a
Gen→Perf −0.006 0.068 0.099 0.46 n/a
Gen→VCC 0.032 0.066 0.491 0.31 n/a
Exp→Perf 0.15 0.09 1.67 0.047 n/a
Exp→VCC −0.07 0.092 0.743 0.23 n/a
Moderating Effect
REAxVCC→Perf 0.06 0.09 0.71 0.24 H5 not supported
Indirect Effects
AS→VCC→Perf 0.04 0.021 1.815 0.035 H6a supported
List→VCC→Perf 0.03 0.020 1.785 0.037 H6b supported
Comm→VCC→Perf 0.03 0.023 1.298 0.097 H6c not supported
Non-hypothesized Effects
List→AS 0.40 0.06 6.489 0.000 n/a
Comm→AS 0.20 0.07 2.98 0.001 n/a
AS = Adaptive Selling; List = Listening; Comm = Communication; VCC = Value Co-Creation; REA = Relationship Enhancing Activities; Perf = Sales Performance;
Gen = Gender; Exp = Sales Experience; n/a = Not Applicable.

increases sales quota levels achieved by salesperson
(β = 0.19, p = .003), validating H4. In H5, relation­
ship-enhancing activities undertaken by salespeo­
ple in an ongoing buyer-seller relationship was
hypothesized to positively moderate the relation­
ship between value co-creation and sales perfor­
mance. Moderator analysis in PLS was conducted
using the product indicator approach (Hair et al.
2016). Support was not found for a positive inter­
action effect of relationship-enhancing activities
and value co-creation on sales performance
(β = 0.06, p = .24), therefore H5 was not corrobo­
rated. In H6a, it was proposed that value co-
creation mediates the relationship between adap­
tive selling and sales performance. Similarly, in H6b
and H6c, it was hypothesized that value co-creation
mediates the relationship between listening and
sales performance, and the relationship between
communication and sales performance, respec­
tively. The indirect effect of an independent factor
on a dependent factor through a mediating factor is
assessed to establish mediation. If the indirect effect
is significant, then mediation has occurred
(Matthews, Hair, and Matthews 2018). If mediation
is established, then the statistical significance of the
direct relationship between the independent and
dependent variables is used to determine if full or
partial mediation has occurred. A non-significant
direct effect indicates full mediation, while
a significant direct effect indicates partial mediation
(Matthews, Hair, and Matthews 2018).
The PLS results show that the indirect effect of
adaptive selling on sales performance is positive and
significant (β = 0.04, p = .035), providing support for
H6a. The direct effect of adaptive selling on sales
performance is not significant (β = 0.003, p = .484)
showing the relationship between adaptive selling
and sales performance is fully mediated by value co-
creation. The indirect effect of listening on sales
performance is positive and significant (β = 0.03,
p = .037) in support of H6b. Furthermore, the direct
effect of listening on sales performance is not sig­
nificant (β = 0.029, p = .39), demonstrating full
mediation. The indirect effect of communication
on sales performance was not significant (β = 0.03,
p = .097), therefore H6c was not supported.
Although not hypothesized, listening and com­
munication were positively related to adaptive selling
(β = 0.40, p < .001) and (β = 0.20, p = .001)
respectively.
Discussion
Although value co–creation in the sales literature
attracts considerable attention, the majority of the
studies examine it from conceptual (Baumann and
358 H. ALNAKHLI ET AL.
Meunier-fitzhugh 2015; Hartmann, Wieland, and
Vargo 2018; Ulaga and Kohli 2018) or qualitative
(Plouffe et al. 2020; Baumann, Le Meunier-fitzhugh,
and Wilson 2017; Baumann and LeMeunier-
FitzHugh 2015) perspectives. Therefore, current
research has been designed to improve our knowl­
edge of value co–creation at the salesperson level
(Blocker et al. 2012). We extend this line of research
by highlighting salesperson adaptive selling, listen­
ing, and communication as practical factors that
enable value co-creation with customers.
Furthermore, salesperson value co-creation is
found to facilitate the positive impacts of adaptive
selling and listening on sales performance. Thus,
acting as value co-creator, a salesperson is able to
translate her/his listening and adaptive selling skills
into higher sales outcomes. Our findings suggest that
salespeople need to be good listeners, know how to
adapt their sales approaches, and keep on going good
communication with their customers to facilitate the
value co-creation with their customers, which in
turn drives sales performance.
We also look at the performance impact of value
co-creation by salespeople and the effect of rela­
tionship-enhancement activities. While salesperson
value co-creation increases sales outcomes, we
didn’t find a support in favor of the moderating
effect of relationship enhancing activities on this
relationship. Our study’s findings have substantial
theoretical implications and provide multiple con­
tributions to the sales literature.
Theoretical implications
From a theoretical standpoint, we pinpoint three
vital antecedents to value co-creation. We investi­
gate the effect of three antecedents of salesperson
value co-creation (i.e. adaptive selling, listening,
and communication) and provide insights on
their positive relation to value co–creation. By
anchoring our research in SDL theory and the
value co-creation literature, we show that salespeo­
ple who adapt their sales approaches are better able
to interact and engage with customers, are more
likely to hold value expressive attitudes toward
customers, and ultimately co-create value.
Further, we find that when salespeople effec­
tively listen to their customers and can better
understand their needs, they will creatively
provide solutions to customers by jointly working
with them during the solution development pro­
cess, and as a result co-create value with them.
Similarly, a salesperson’s communication skills
have collective impacts that positively contribute
to the value co-creation process. Second, results
indicate that value co-creation holds a positive
influence on objective sales performance, where
higher sales quota levels are achieved through the
salesperson’s ability to co-create value. This con­
firms prior research showing when salespeople
practice proactive behaviors, such as value co-
creation, they improve their sales performance
(Varela et al. 2019). Third, as a result of account­
ing for the effect of the control variables (age,
gender and sales experience), results show that
the interaction of relationship-enhancement activ­
ities is not a significant moderator of the relation­
ship between value co-creation and objective sales
performance.
Finally, our study results provide additional sup­
port to the critical role salespeople play in the firm
value co-creation process (e.g., Baumann and
LeMeunier-FitzHugh 2015). While previous find­
ings have shown that the positive effects of listening
and adaptive selling on sales performance is
mediated by relationship selling (e.g., Itani, Goad,
and Jaramillo 2019), we extend these findings to
show how value co-creation also mediates these
effects. The co-creation of value is contingent on
interpersonal interactions and encounters
(Grönroos and Voima 2013; Prahalad and
Ramaswamy 2004), which to a great extent occurs
between customers and salespeople who act as
‘ambassadors’ for their firms (Geigenmüller and
Greschuchna 2011) and concurrently ‘translating’
the voice of customers back to the firm (Blocker
et al. 2012).
In conclusion, we believe that the current study
advances the agenda for sales and marketing stra­
tegies related to the achievement of competitive
differentiation through value co-creation. As more
firms find themselves in very competitive environ­
ments, they need to build closer customer relation­
ships by getting their salespeople to enhance the
value co-creation process with customers. For sell­
ing organizations to create a culture of value co-
creation, they will need to focus on indicators of
behavioral performance such as listening, adaptive

selling, and communication because such indica­
tors are proven to be the enablers of value co-
creation between salespeople and customers
(Baumann and LeMeunier-FitzHugh 2015).
Managerial implications
With many sales organizations struggling to achieve
competitive differentiation (CSO Insights 2018), and
avoid the commoditization trap, we argue value co-
creation is one way sales forces can help firms create
competitive differentiation. With a value co-creation
approach, the focus of salespeople shifts from simply
recommending a product/service based solely on the
salesperson’s understanding of the customer’s needs,
to a focus on jointly developed solutions based on the
customer’s value systems and the selling organiza­
tion’s capabilities and resources. In a value co-
creation approach, the customer is not a passive
receiver of information from the salesperson, but an
active participant in the value creation process.
Similarly, the salesperson’s role is not just
a persuasive purveyor of information and products/
services to the customer, but instead their role is
more akin to a solution architect who utilizes their
own knowledge, abilities, and behaviors along with
resources within their organization to jointly create
a mutually beneficial solution with the customer.
Our study has defined some of the factors that
stimulate successful value co-creation with customers
and can be applied in various B2B sales contexts.
From a firm perspective, our study’s findings provide
practical understandings for sales leaders and orga­
nizations. First, sales managers need to recognize that
managing a salesforce capable of co-creating value is
critical to achieving high-performance. With the high
interest in thoughts related to adaptive selling skills,
ability to listen, and effectively communicate with
customers, it could be an excellent opportunity to
build a salesforce capable of supporting the firm’s
overall value co-creation strategy. Moreover, these
factors are prerequisites to effective value co-
creation with customers (Baumann and LeMeunier-
FitzHugh 2015).
Second, managers need to raise awareness
among their salespeople of the importance of
value co-creation with customers and can accom­
plish this through training. Managers also should
strive to support a culture among the salesforce that
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING 359
brings a value co-creation approach to selling activ­
ities. To fully realize the benefits of value co-
creation, it is not just the salesperson that should
act as a partner to the customer, but other depart­
ments within the selling firm should work with the
sales department to help salespeople develop solu­
tions with customers. As our study advocates, capi­
talizing on initiatives to encourage adaptive selling,
listening, and communication skills of salespeople
would lead to an effective system of value co-
creation process in sales interactions. For instance,
a salesperson may attend behavioral skills training
(Latham 1989) to develop the sales skills needed.
Third, sales managers and leaders should invest in
organizational resources and strategies that support
salespeople to co-create value with customers com­
petently. For example, the amount of money devoted
to obtaining data about customers’ operations and
business models serves as a valued asset for creating
and delivering better value propositions. Sales man­
agers should also instruct salespeople on the intra-
organizational role of sales’ (Plouffe 2018), so sales­
people become more effective in leveraging internal
company resources to assist the salesperson in co-
creating value. In addition, salespeople should be
trained on involving customers in solution develop­
ment, rather than just giving a typical sales presenta­
tion. Salespeople should also be encouraged to learn
as much as possible about their customers’ industries
and market challenges. When salespeople have
a thorough understanding of their customers’ indus­
try, they will become more adept at collaborating
with customers to jointly co-create solutions with
them and will be in a better position to create com­
petitive differentiation vis-à-vis other competitors.
For example, at the focal firm used in this study,
which offers products and services to the commer­
cial building, chemical, automotive, HVAC, and oil
and gas industries, salespeople are trained on value
co-creation. Salespeople work with engineering and
production teams to create customized solutions for
customers based on customer input. As a result, the
firm does not have to resort to offering price con­
cessions as an inducement to win business from
customers.
Finally, we recommend sales managers develop
an orderly linkage of value co-creation process with
sales job’s content. It may offer new and interesting
insights about top priorities in sales management.
360 H. ALNAKHLI ET AL.
For example, sales managers can provide their
salesforce an interaction-based structure of tasks
that are important to co-creating value in seller-
buyer relationships.
Study limitations and future research
While we learn more about the drivers and effects
of salesperson value co-creation, this study, as other
studies, holds a few limitations and provide exciting
avenues to develop future research.
First, this study focused on value co-creation
between salespersons and customers, rather than
the overall value co-creation between selling and
buying firms. Moreover, this research’s outcomes
are an artifact of the method used to define and
capture value co-creation in the salesperson-
customer relationship. Thus, the tangible and
intangible costs linked to the relationship were
mostly overlooked, which should be considered in
upcoming research.
Second, the study focuses mainly on the sales­
person’s perspective. Conversely, a balanced view
that adds to the salesperson’s perspective by con­
sidering the organizational and customer perspec­
tive can provide a more detailed view. Future
studies need to look at both salesperson’s and cus­
tomer’s perspectives to understand further how
adaptive selling, listening, and communication
impact value co-creation and sales performance.
Third, the current study does include one mod­
erator in the proposed model. However, other pos­
sible moderators are worth studying, such as the
customer’s organization size, seller-buyer relation­
ship length, offerings type, and market conditions.
Forthcoming studies can include some of these
factors to elucidate this notion and develop
a contingency model of value co-creation.
Fourth, there are several salesperson level vari­
ables such as salesperson emotional intelligence,
knowledge, creativity, as well as sales technology
usage that might trigger value co-creation or mod­
erate (intensify or dampen) the strength of the
relationships found. Finally, data consists of 87%
of male respondents, which in turn raises a concern
related to gender bias. We hope our study moti­
vates future research in the area of value co-
creation in sales.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
References
Aggarwal, P., S. B. Castleberry, R. Ridnour, and C. D. Shepherd.
2005. Salesperson empathy and listening: Impact on relation­
ship outcomes. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice
13 (3):16–31. doi:10.1080/10696679.2005.11658547.
Agnihotri, R., A. Rapp, and K. Trainor. 2009. Understanding
the role of information communication in the buyer-seller
exchange process: Antecedents and outcomes. Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing 24 (7):474–86.
doi:10.1108/08858620910986712.
Agnihotri, R., K. J. Trainor, O. S. Itani, and M. Rodriguez.
2017. Examining the role of sales-based CRM technology
and social media use on post-sale service behaviors in India.
Journal of Business Research 81:144–54. doi:10.1016/j.
jbusres.2017.08.021.
Agnihotri, R., R. Dingus, M. Y. Hu, and M. T. Krush. 2016.
Social media: Influencing customer satisfaction in B2B
sales. Industrial Marketing Management 53:172–80.
doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.09.003.
Alnakhli, H., R. Singh, R. Agnihotri, and O. S. Itani. 2020.
From cognition to action: The effect of thought
self-leadership strategies and self-monitoring on adaptive
selling behavior. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
35 (12):1915–27. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uta.edu/10.1108/
JBIM-06-2019-0302 .
Amyx, D., S. N. Bhuian, and G. D. Shows. 2016. Customer-
salespeople relationship. Marketing Intelligence & Planning
34 (5):586–604. doi:10.1108/MIP-09-2015-0170.
Anaza, N. A., A. E. Inyang, and J. L. Saavedra. 2018. Empathy
and affect in B2B salesperson performance. Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing 33 (1):29–41. doi:10.1108/
JBIM-05-2016-0103.
Anderson, J. C., and J. A. Narus. 1990. A model of distributor
firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships. Journal of
Marketing 54 (1):42–58. doi:10.1177/002224299005400103.
Auh, S., B. Menguc, C. S. Katsikeas, and Y. S. Jung. 2019. When
does customer participation matter? An empirical investiga­
tion of the role of customer empowerment in the customer
participation–performance link. Journal of Marketing
Research 56 (6):1012–33. doi:10.1177/0022243719866408.
Baumann, J., and K. Le Meunier-fitzhugh. 2014. Trust as
a facilitator of co-creation in customer-salesperson interac­
tion–an imperative for the realization of episodic and rela­
tional value? AMS Review 4 (1–2):5–20. doi:10.1007/
s13162-013-0039-8.
Baumann, J., and K. Le Meunier-fitzhugh. 2015. Making value
co-creation a reality–exploring the co-creative value pro­
cesses in customer–salesperson interaction. Journal of
Marketing Management 31 (3–4):289–316. doi:10.1080/
0267257X.2014.956137.

Baumann, J., K. Le Meunier-fitzhugh, and H. N. Wilson. 2017.
The challenge of communicating reciprocal value promises:
Buyer-seller value proposition disparity in professional
services. Industrial Marketing Management 64:107–21.
doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.02.002.
Berry, L. L. 1995. Relationship marketing of services—
growing interest, emerging perspectives. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science 23(4):236–45. doi:10.1177/
009207039502300402.
Blocker, C. P., J. P. Cannon, N. G. Panagopoulos, and
J. K. Sager. 2012. The role of the sales force in value creation
and appropriation: New directions for research. Journal of
Personal Selling & Sales Management 32 (1):15–27.
doi:10.2753/PSS0885-3134320103.
Boorom, M. L., J. R. Goolsby, and R. P. Ramsey. 1998.
Relational communication traits and their effect on
adaptiveness and sales performance. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science 26 (1):16–30.
doi:10.1177/0092070398261003.
Castleberry, S. B., and C. D. Shepherd. 1993. Effective inter­
personal listening and personal selling. The Journal of
Personal Selling & Sales Management 13 (1):35–49.
Castleberry, S. B., C. D. Shepherd, and R. Ridnour. 1999.
Effective interpersonal listening in the personal selling
environment: Conceptualization, measurement, and nomo­
logical validity. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice
7 (1):30–38. doi:10.1080/10696679.1999.11501817.
Chen, Chien-Chung, and Fernando Jaramillo. 2014. The
double-edged effects of emotional intelligence on the
adaptive selling–salesperson-owned loyalty relationship.
Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 34
(1):33–50.
Comer, L. B., and T. Drollinger. 1999. Active empathetic listen­
ing and selling success: A conceptual framework. Journal of
Personal Selling & Sales Management 19 (1):15–29.
Corsaro, D., and I. Snehota. 2010. Searching for relationship
value in business markets: Are we missing something?
Industrial Marketing Management 39 (6):986–95.
doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.06.018.
Cossío-Silva, F., M. Revilla-Camacho, M. Vega-Vázquez, and
B. Palacios-Florencio. 2016. Value co-creation and custo­
mer loyalty. Journal of Business Research 69 (5):1621–25.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.028.
Crosby, L. A., K. R. Evans, and D. Cowles. 1990. Relationship
quality in services selling: An interpersonal influence
perspective. Journal of Marketing 54 (3):68–81. doi:10.1177/
002224299005400306.
de Oliveira, D. T., and M. N. Cortimiglia. 2017. Value
co-creation in web-based multisided platforms:
A conceptual framework and implications for business
model design. Business Horizons 60 (6):747–58.
doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2017.07.002.
De Wulf, K., G. Odekerken-Schröder, and D. Iacobucci. 2001.
Investments in consumer relationships: A cross-country
and cross-industry exploration. Journal of Marketing
65 (4):33–50. doi:10.1509/jmkg.65.4.33.18386.
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING 361
Delpechitre, D., L. L. Beeler-Connelly, and N. N. Chaker. 2018.
Customer value co-creation behavior: A dyadic exploration
of the influence of salesperson emotional intelligence on
customer participation and citizenship behavior. Journal of
Business Research 2:9–24. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.05.007.
Dion, P. A., and E. M. Notarantonio. 1992. Salesperson com­
munication style: The neglected dimension in sales
performance. The Journal of Business Communication
(1973) 29 (1):63–77. doi:10.1177/002194369202900104.
Drollinger, T., and L. B. Comer. 2013. Salesperson’s listening
ability as an antecedent to relationship selling. Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing 28 (1):50–59. doi:10.1108/
08858621311285714.
Dwyer, F. R., P. H. Schurr, and S. Oh. 1987. Developing
buyer-seller relationships. The Journal of Marketing
51 (2):11–27. doi:10.1177/002224298705100202.
Eckert, James A.2006 . Adaptive selling behavior: adding depth
and specificity to the range of adaptive outputs. American
Journal of Business 21 (1):31–40. doi:10.1108/
19355181200600003.
Ettlie, J. E., and E. M. Reza. 1992. Organizational integration
and process innovation. Academy of Management Journal
35 (4):795–827.
Fornell, C., and D. F. Larcker. 1981. Evaluating structural
equation models with unobservable variables and measure­
ment error. Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1):39–50.
doi:10.1177/002224378101800104.
Franklin, D., and R. Marshall. 2019. Adding co-creation as an
antecedent condition leading to trust in business-to-
business relationships. Industrial Marketing Management
77:170–81. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.10.002.
Friend, S. B., A. Malshe, and G. J. Fisher. 2020. What drives
customer Re-engagement? The foundational role of the
sales-service interplay in episodic value co-creation.
Industrial Marketing Management 84:271–86. doi:10.1016/
j.indmarman.2019.07.012.
Gabler, C. B., R. Agnihotri, and O. S. Itani. 2017. Can sales­
person guilt lead to more satisfied customers? Findings
from India. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
32 (7):951–61. doi:10.1108/JBIM-12-2016-0287.
Geigenmüller, A., and L. Greschuchna. 2011. How to establish
trustworthiness in initial service encounters. Journal of
Marketing Theory & Practice 19 (4):391–406. doi:10.2753/
MTP1069-6679190403.
Grönroos, C. 2009. Marketing as promise management:
Regaining customer management for marketing. Journal
of Business & Industrial Marketing 24 (5/6):351–59.
doi:10.1108/08858620910966237.
Grönroos, C., and P. Voima. 2013. Critical service logic:
Making sense of value creation and co-creation. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science 41 (2):133–50.
doi:10.1007/s11747-012-0308-3.
Grönroos, C. 2012. Conceptualising value co-creation:
A journey to the 1970s and back to the future. Journal of
Marketing Management 28 (13/14):1520–34. doi:10.1080/
0267257X.2012.737357.
362 H. ALNAKHLI ET AL.
Haas, A., I. Snehota, and D. Corsaro. 2012. Creating value in
business relationships: The role of sales. Industrial
Marketing Management 4 (1):94–105. doi:10.1016/j.
indmarman.2011.11.004.
Hair, J. F., G. T. M. Hult, C. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2016.
A primer on partial least squares structural equation model­
ing (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
Hair, J. F., J. J. Risher, M. Sarstedt, and C. M. Ringle. 2019. When
to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European
Business Review 31 (1):2–24. doi:10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203.
Hartmann, N. N., H. Wieland, and S. L. Vargo. 2018.
Converging on a new theoretical foundation for selling.
Journal of Marketing 82 (2):1–18. doi:10.1509/jm.16.0268.
Henseler, J., C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2015. A new
criterion for assessing discriminant validity in
variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science 43 (1):115–35.
doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
Hinterhuber, A. 2017. Value quantification capabilities in
industrial markets. Journal of Business Research 76:163–78.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.11.019.
Hossain, M. T., and L. B. Chonko. 2018. Relational commu­
nication and illusionary loyalty: Moderating role of
self-construal. Industrial Marketing Management
69:221–34. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.08.018.
Ida, E. 2017. The role of customers’ involvement in value co-
creation behaviour is value co-creation the source of com­
petitive advantage? Journal of Competitiveness 9 (3):51–66.
doi:10.7441/joc.2017.03.04.
Ingram, T. N., C. H. Schwepker, and D. Hutson. 1992. Why
salespeople fail. Industrial Marketing Management
21 (3):225–30. doi:10.1016/0019-8501(92)90019-P.
Insights, C. S. O. 2018. The growing buyer-seller gap: Results
of the 2018 buyer preferences study. Accessed July 20, 2020.
https://www.csoinsights.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/
2018/08/Buyer-Seller-Gap_v3.pdf
Itani, O. S., E. A. Goad, and F. Jaramillo. 2019. Building
customer relationships while achieving sales performance
results: Is listening the holy grail of sales? Journal of Business
Research 102:120–30. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.04.048.
Itani, O. S., F. Jaramillo, and B. Paesbrugghe. 2020. Between
a rock and a hard place: Seizing the opportunity of demand­
ing customers by means of frontline service behaviors.
Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services 53:101978.
doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101978.
Itani, O. S., M. T. Krush, R. Agnihotri, and K. J. Trainor. 2020.
Social media and customer relationship management tech­
nologies: Influencing buyer-seller information exchanges.
Industrial Marketing Management 90:264–75. doi:10.1016/
j.indmarman.2020.07.015.
Janakiraman, N., J. Bullemore, L. Valenzuela-Fernández, and
J. F. Jaramillo. 2019. Listening and perseverance–two sides
to a coin in quality evaluations. Journal of Consumer
Marketing 36 (1):72–81. doi:10.1108/JCM-11-2016-2000.
Jaramillo, F., W. B. Locander, P. E. Spector, and E. G. Harris.
2007. Getting the job done: The moderating role of initiative
on the relationship between intrinsic motivation and adap­
tive selling. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management
27 (1):59–74. doi:10.2753/PSS0885-3134270104.
Johnson, J. S., S. B. Friend, and B. J. Horn. 2014. Levels of analysis
and sources of data in sales research: A multilevel-multisource
review. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management
34 (1):70–86. doi:10.1080/08853134.2013.870185.
Kaski, T. A., P. Hautamaki, E. B. Pullins, and H. Kock. 2017.
Buyer versus salesperson expectations for an initial B2B
sales meeting. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
32 (1):46–56. doi:10.1108/JBIM-12-2015-0246.
Kohtamäki, M., and J. Partanen. 2016. Co-creating value from
knowledge-intensive business services in manufacturing
firms: The moderating role of relationship learning in sup­
plier–customer interactions. Journal of Business Research
69 (7):2498–506. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.019.
Kohtamäki, Marko, and Jukka Partanen. 2016. Co-creating
value from knowledge-intensive business services in man­
ufacturing firms: The moderating role of relationship learn­
ing in supplier–customer interactions. Journal of Business
Research 69 (7):2498–2506.
Latham, G. P. 1989. Behavioral approaches to the training and
learning process. In Behavioral approaches to the training
and learning process Training and development in organiza­
tions, ed. I. L. Goldstein, 256–295. California: Jossey-Bass.
Le meunier-fitzhugh, K., and N. F. Piercy. 2007. Does collabora­
tion between sales and marketing affect business performance?
Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 27 (3):207–20.
doi:10.2753/PSS0885-3134270301.
Liinamaa, J., M. Viljanen, A. Hurmerinta, M. Ivanova-Gongne,
H. Luotola, and M. Gustafsson. 2016. Performance-based
and functional contracting in value-based solution selling.
Industrial Marketing Management 59:37–49. doi:10.1016/j.
indmarman.2016.05.032.
Marcos-Cuevas, J., S. Nätti, T. Palo, and J. Baumann. 2016.
Value co-creation practices and capabilities: Sustained pur­
poseful engagement across B2B systems. Industrial
Marketing Management 56:97–107. doi:10.1016/j.
indmarman.2016.03.012.
Marshall, G. W., D. J. Goebel, and W. C. Moncrief. 2003. Hiring
for success at the buyer–seller interface. Journal of Business
Research 56 (4):247–55. doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00435-6.
Matthews, L., J. Hair, and R. Matthews. 2018. PLS-SEM: THE
HOLY GRAIL FOR ADVANCED ANALYSIS. Marketing
Management Journal 28 (1):1–13.
Morgan, R. M., and S. D. Hunt. 1994. The commitment-trust
theory of relationship marketing. The Journal of Marketing
58 (3):20–38. doi:10.1177/002224299405800302.
Navarro, S., C. Llinares, and D. Garzon. 2016. Exploring the
relationship between co-creation and satisfaction using
QCA. Journal of Business Research 69 (4):1336–39.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.103.

Ordanini, A., and P. Pasini. 2008. Service co-production and
value co-creation: The case for a service-oriented architec­
ture SOA. European Management Journal 26 (5):289–97.
doi:10.1016/j.emj.2008.04.005.
Palmatier, R. W., L. K. Scheer, and J. E. Steenkamp. 2007.
Customer loyalty to whom? Managing the benefits and
risks of salesperson-owned loyalty. Journal of Marketing
Research 44 (2)):185–99. doi:10.1509/jmkr.44.2.185.
Palmatier, R. W., M. B. Houston, R. P. Dant, and D. Grewal.
2013. Relationship velocity: Toward a theory of relationship
dynamics. Journal of Marketing 77 (1):13–30. doi:10.1509/
jm.11.0219.
Paparoidamis, Nicholas G., and Paolo Guenzi. 2009. An
empirical investigation into the impact of relationship sell­
ing and LMX on salespeople's behaviours and sales effec­
tiveness. European Journal of Marketing 43 (7/8):1053–
1075. 10.1108/03090560910961515 .
Parasuraman, A. 1998. Customer service in business-to-busi­
ness markets: An agenda for research. Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing 13 (4/5):309–21. doi:10.1108/
08858629810226636.
Park, J. E., and G. D. Deitz. 2006. The effect of working
relationship quality on salesperson performance and job
satisfaction: Adaptive selling behavior in Korean automo­
bile sales representatives. Journal of Business Research
59 (2):204–13. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.04.002.
Park, Jeong Eun, Juyoung Kim, Alan J. Dubinsky, and Hyunju
Lee. 2010. How does sales force automation influence rela­
tionship quality and performance? The mediating roles of
learning and selling behaviors. Industrial marketing man­
agement 39 (7):1128–1138.
Payne, A., K. Storbacka, P. Frow, and S. Knox. 2009. Co-
creating brands: Diagnosing and designing the relationship
experience. Journal of Business Research 62 (3):379–89.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.05.013.
Pilon, F., and E. Hadjielias. 2017. Strategic account manage­
ment as a value co-creation selling model in the pharma­
ceutical industry. Journal of Business & Industrial
Marketing 32 (2):310–25. doi:10.1108/JBIM-05-2015-0100.
Pinnington, B. D., and T. J. Scanlon. 2009. Antecedents of
collective-value within business-to-business relationships.
European Journal of Marketing 43 (1/2):31–45.
doi:10.1108/03090560910923229.
Plouffe, C. R., D. Nagel, L. Bonney, B. Hochstein, and J. Salas.
2020. The Austrian view and value co-creation process in
solution-oriented firms: A seven stage,solution prototyping
framework. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice
28 (1):79–97. doi:10.1080/10696679.2019.1671202.
Plouffe, C. R. 2018. Is it navigation, networking, coordination or
what? A multidisciplinary review of influences on the intraor­
ganizational dimension of the sales role and performance.
Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management
38 (2):241–64. doi:10.1080/08853134.2018.1450147.
Prahalad, C. K., and V. Ramaswamy. 2000. Co-opting custo­
mer competence. Harvard Business Review 78 (1):79–90.
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING 363
Prahalad, C. K., and V. Ramaswamy. 2004. Co-creation
experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of
Interactive Marketing 18 (3):5–14. doi:10.1002/dir.20015.
Preikschas, Michael W., Pablo Cabanelas, Klaus Rüdiger, and
Jesús F. Lampón. 2017. Value co-creation, dynamic capabil­
ities and customer retention in industrial markets. Journal
of Business & Industrial Marketing 32 (3):409–420.
doi:10.1108/JBIM-10-2014-0215.
Pryor, S., A. Malshe, and K. Paradise. 2013. Salesperson listen­
ing in the extended sales relationship: An exploration of
cognitive, affective, and temporal dimensions. Journal of
Personal Selling & Sales Management 33 (2):185–96.
doi:10.2753/PSS0885-3134330203.
Pullins, E. B., H. Timonen, T. Kaski, and M. Holopainen. 2017.
An investigation of the theory practice gap in professional
sales. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice 25 (1):17–38.
doi:10.1080/10696679.2016.1236665.
Ramaswamy, V., and K. Ozcan. 2018. What is co-creation? An
interactional creation framework and its implications for
value creation. Journal of Business Research 84:196–205.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.027.
Ramsey, R. P., and R. S. Sohi. 1997. Listening to your custo­
mers: The impact of perceived salesperson listening beha­
vior on relationship outcomes. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 25 (2):127–37. doi:10.1007/BF02894348.
Rich, M. K., and D. C. Smith. 2000. Determining relationship
skills of prospective salespeople. Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing 15 (4):242–59. doi:10.1108/
08858620010335100.
Richardson. 2019. 2019 Selling challenges study. Accessed July
20, 2020. https://www.richardson.com/sales-resources
/2019-selling-challenges-study-research/
Ringle, C. M., S. Wende, and J. M. Becker. 2015. SmartPLS 3.
Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH. http://www.smartpls.com .
Robinson, L., Jr, G. W. Marshall, W. C. Moncrief, and F. G. Lassk.
2002. Toward a shortened measure of adaptive selling. Journal
of Personal Selling & Sales Management 22 (2):111–18.
Román, Sergio, and Dawn Iacobucci. 2010. Antecedents and
consequences of adaptive selling confidence and behavior: a
dyadic analysis of salespeople and their customers. Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science 38 (3):363–382.
Rutherford, B. N., N. A. Anaza, and A. H. Phillips. 2012.
Predictors of buyer-seller firm conflict. Journal of
Marketing Theory & Practice 20 (2):161–72. doi:10.2753/
MTP1069-6679200203.
Sarmento, M., C. Simões, and M. Farhangmehr. 2015.
Applying a relationship marketing perspective to B2B
trade fairs: The role of socialization episodes. Industrial
Marketing Management 44:131–41. doi:10.1016/j.
indmarman.2014.10.010.
Sin, L. Y. M., A. C. B. Tse, O. H. M. Yau, R. P. M. Chow,
J. S. Y. Lee, and L. B. Y. Lau. 2005. Relationship marketing
orientation: Scale development and cross-cultural validation.
Journal of Business Research 58 (2):185–94. doi:10.1016/S0148-
2963(02)00493-9.
364 H. ALNAKHLI ET AL.
Sinkovics, R. R., O. Kuivalainen, and A. S. Roath. 2018. Value
co-creation in an outsourcing arrangement between manu­
facturers and third party logistics providers: Resource com­
mitment, innovation and collaboration. Journal of Business
& Industrial Marketing 33 (4):563–73. doi:10.1108/JBIM-
03-2017-0082.
Spiro, Rosann L., and Barton A. Weitz. 1990. Adaptive selling:
Conceptualization, measurement, and nomological validity.
Journal of marketing Research 27 (1):61–69.
Sullivan, U. Y., R. M. Peterson, and V. Krishnan. 2012. Value
creation and firm sales performance: The mediating roles of
strategic account management and relationship perception.
Industrial Marketing Management 41 (1):166–73.
doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2011.11.019.
Ulaga, W., and A. K. Kohli. 2018. The role of a solutions
salesperson: Reducing uncertainty and fostering
adaptiveness. Industrial Marketing Management
69:161–68. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.11.008.
Varela, J. A., B. Bande, M. Del Rio, and F. Jaramillo. 2019.
Servant leadership, proactive work behavior, and perfor­
mance overall rating: Testing a multilevel model of moder­
ated mediation. Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing
26 (2):177–95. doi:10.1080/1051712X.2019.1603417.
Vargo, S. L., and R. F. Lusch. 2004. Evolving to a new domi­
nant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing 68 (1):1–17.
doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036.
Vargo, S. L., and R. F. Lusch. 2008. Service-dominant logic:
Continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 36 (1):1–10. doi:10.1007/s11747-007-
0069-6.
Vargo, S. L., and R. F. Lusch. 2016. Institutions and axioms:
An extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science 44 (1):5–23.
doi:10.1007/s11747-015-0456-3.
Verbeke, W., B. Dietz, and E. Verwaal. 2011. Drivers of sales
performance: A contemporary meta-analysis. Have sales­
people become knowledge brokers? Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science 39 (3):407–28. doi:10.1007/s11747-
010-0211-8.
Viio, P., and C. Grönroos. 2016. How buyer–seller relation­
ship orientation affects adaptation of sales processes to the
buying process. Industrial Marketing Management
52:37–46. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.07.013.
Walter, A., T. Ritter, and H. G. Gemünden. 2001. Value crea­
tion in buyer–seller relationships: Theoretical considera­
tions and empirical results from a supplier’s perspective.
Industrial Marketing Management 30 (4):365–77.
doi:10.1016/S0019-8501(01)00156-0.
Weitz, Barton A., Harish Sujan, and Mita Sujan. 1986.
Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behavior: A frame­
work for improving selling effectiveness. Journal of market­
ing 50 (4):174–191.
Williams, K. C., R. L. Spiro, and L. M. Fine. 1990. The
customer-salesperson dyad: An interaction/communication
model and review. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales
Management 10 (3):29–43.
Woodruff, R. B., and D. J. Flint. 2006. Marketing’s service-
dominant logic and customer value. In The service-dominant
logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions. United
Kingdom: Routledge, 183–95.
Yen, D. A., B. R. Barnes, and C. L. Wang. 2011. The measure­
ment of guanxi: Introducing the GRX scale. Industrial
Marketing Management 40 (1):97–108. doi:10.1016/j.
indmarman.2010.09.014.
Zaborek, P., and J. Mazur. 2019. Enabling value co-creation
with consumers as a driver of business performance: A dual
perspective of Polish manufacturing and service SMEs.
Journal of Business Research 104:541–51. doi:10.1016/j.
jbusres.2018.12.067.
Zhou, Y., X. Zhang, G. Zhuang, and N. Zhou. 2015. Relational
norms and collaborative activities: Roles in reducing oppor­
tunism in marketing channels. Industrial Marketing
Management 46:147–59. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.
01.014.

Appendix A Review of Literature of Value Co-Creation in Sales
Citation Purpose
This Study Examines the effects of salesperson Empirical –
behaviors on value co-creation,
and the effect of value co-
creation by salespeople on sales
performance.
Friend, Malshe, Examines the role of intra-
and Fisher organization and inter-
2020 organization interactions of
salespeople/service
representatives in buyer’s
decisions to continue or defect
their partnership through value
co-creation and re-engagement.
Plouffe et al. Develops a conceptual framework Conceptual with
2020 to examine how the selling firm
and salesperson co-create value.
Delpechitre, Explores how salesperson emotional Empirical –
Beeler- intelligence and empathy
Connelly, and influences the value co-creation
Chaker 2018 behaviors of customers.
Hartmann, Redefining enterprise selling within Conceptual
Wieland, and a comprehensive service
Vargo 2018 ecosystem.
Ulaga and Kohli Relates three types of uncertainty
2018 (need, process & outcome)
between buyers and sellers and
understand the role of
salespeople in the solution co-
creation process.
Baumann, Le Explores reciprocal value
Meunier- propositions in buyer-seller
fitzhugh, and interactions and the value-co-
Wilson 2017 creation process.
Kaski et al. 2017 Investigates the value creation
expectations of buyers and
salespeople during initial sales
meetings.
Pilon and Examines the role of strategic
Hadjielias account managers in a value co-
2017 creation selling
Kohtamäki and Testing the moderating effect of
Partanen 2016 relationship learning in the link
between sellers’ knowledge-
intensive business services and
sellers’ buyer-specific sales
performance.
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING 365
Type Sample Findings
201 B2B salespeople of an Identifies antecedents to value co-
Quantitative industrial goods manufacturer creation by salespeople, and
demonstrates value co-creation
has a positive effect on sales
performance.
Conceptual with in- 11 sellers & 63 buyer accounts The integration between sales and
depth interviews (115 informants) representing service employees is important
multiple industries for knowledge flows and insights
needed to drive recurrent value
co-creation within collaborative
buyer-seller relationships.
15 sales managers, and 14 sales Developed a solution prototyping
some qualitative employees framework of value co-created
aspects solutions with an emphasis on
the specific behaviors that
salespeople should practice.
224 salespeople-customer dyads. Found salesperson emotional
Quantitative intelligence and empathy has
a positive effect on the value co-
creation behaviors of customers.
n/a Value co-creation is linked to
salespeople’s service exchange
with buyers.
Conceptual n/a Uncertainty is present in the four
stages of the solution co-creation
process. The solution-based role
of salesperson helps reduce
uncertainty across the solution
co-creation process by providing
pertinent information to
stakeholders within the buyer
and seller organizations, making
adjustments needed and
encouraging adaptability.
Empirical – 18 art salespeople and 13 art Found buyers and sellers co-create
Qualitative customers value through reciprocal value
propositions, but discrepancies
exist between buyer’s expected
value and seller’s value
propositions.
Empirical – 16 (salespeople & sales managers) Buyers’ and sellers’ expectations of
Qualitative (in- & 22 (buyers) from multiple value creation don’t match and
depth interviews) industries buyers’ expectations are not fairly
satisfied. Salespeople’s
expectations to create value with
buyers majorly result from their
personal skills and behaviors as
well as the solutions they sell.
Empirical – 22 hospital directors (seller – Strategic account management
Qualitative (in- pharmaceutical) function as a client-centered and
depth interviews value co-creation selling model.
and multiple-case Customer-tailored value-added
study) initiatives and relationship
enhancers are two key
dimensions that enable value co-
creation in buyer-seller
relationship.
Empirical – 91 managing directors, production Knowledge-intensive business
Quantitative managers, account/sales services do not enhance sales
managers/business developers performance thus sellers must
(majority) and R&D managers – depend on relationship learning
manufacturing industry to co-create value with buyers.
(Continued)
366 H. ALNAKHLI ET AL.

(Continued).
Citation Purpose Type Sample Findings
Marcos-Cuevas Investigating the concept of Empirical – 648 buyers (meetings), 70 sales Sales organizations need to adopt
et al. 2016 sustained purposeful qualitative executives/account managers – linking, materializing and
engagement and exploring the (ethnography - various industries institutionalizing practices to co-
capabilities and actions sales shadowing create value with buyers. The
organizations utilize to co-create salespeople, concept of sustained purposeful
value when interacting with observations and engagement underpins the
buyers. workshops) ability of sales organizations to
co-create and capture value.
Viio and Explores the impact of buyer-seller Empirical -Qualitative 9 Executives from the seller and Value-based buyer-seller business
Grönroos relationship on the adaptation of buyer sides. engagement is the result of high
2016 sellers’ sale process to fit buyers’ relational orientation for buyers
buying process and sellers.
Baumann and Conceptualizes and examines the Empirical -Qualitative 18 art salespeople, and 13 art Found buyers and sellers have
LeMeunier- process of value co-creation buyers unique roles during a co-creative
FitzHugh 2015 during buyer-seller interactions interaction, and found shared
interest, dialogue, commitment
and common goals are enablers
of value co-creation.
Baumann and Conceptualizes how trust facilitates Conceptual n/a Developed a framework of how
Meunier- value co-creation between buyers trust facilitates value co-creation
fitzhugh 2015 and sellers through the during buyer-seller interactions.
customer’s disclosure of their
value systems.
Blocker et al. Develops a framework that shows Conceptual n/a Salespeople should engage in more
2012 how the sales force creates and active relational process to co-
appropriates value in buyer-seller create value with customers to
relationships satisfy their needs.
Haas, Snehota, Explains how salespeople contribute Empirical -Qualitative 43 salespeople and sales The role of sales function in co-
and Corsaro to value creation in business managers creation of relationship value is
2012 relationships neglected. Major sales value-
creating tasks in buyer-seller
relationships are jointness,
balanced initiative, interacted
value and socio-cognitive
construction.
 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING 367

Appendix B Construct Items and Loadings

Construct Name and Indicators Indicator loadings

Adaptive Selling (adapted from Robinson et al. 2002)
When I feel that my sales approach is not working, I can easily change to another approach 0.79
I like to experiment with different sales approaches 0.71
I am very flexible in the sales approach I use 0.84
I can easily use a wide variety of sales approaches 0.87
I try to understand how one customer differs from another 0.73
Communication (adapted from Le Meunier-fitzhugh and Piercy 2007)
We have meetings with customers at least once a quarter to discuss market trends and developments 0.87
Salespeople spend time with customers assessing their future needs 0.87
Salespeople and customers get together periodically to plan responses to changes taking place in the business environment 0.88
Salesperson Listening (adapted from Ramsey and Sohi 1997)
Sensing dimension
I focus only on the customer (dropped) 0.37
I keep firm eye contact. 0.87
I look for non-verbal gestures suggesting he/she is listening to me 0.77
I try not to look bored. 0.65
Evaluating dimension
I ask for more details 0.71
I paraphrase my questions (dropped) 0.46
I do not interrupt the customer 0.75
I do not change the subject too frequently 0.74
I try hard to understand what the customer is saying 0.80
Responding dimension
I use full sentences instead of saying yes or no. (dropped) 0.42
I offer relevant information to questions asked by the customer 0.85
I show eagerness about customer responses 0.79
I answer questions at the appropriate time 0.88
Value Co-Creation (Ettlie and Reza 1992; Walter, Ritter, and Gemünden 2001)
We involve customers in decisions concerning product development and manufacturing. 0.83
We share the technology of our new systems with customers 0.73
We change product standards to benefit customers 0.83
We engage in the joint development of production processes with customers 0.83
We engage in the joint development of new products with customers 0.91
We involve our customers in the testing of prototypes 0.64
Relationship-Enhancing Activities (Palmatier, Scheer, and Steenkamp 2007)
My customers often receive special treatment or status 0.71
My customers often receive special financial benefits and incentives 0.84
Our policies and procedures are often adapted for my customers 0.79

View publication stats