Knowledge sharing behaviors of industrial salespeople
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – This paper extends the sales literature by moving beyond salespeople ' s role as knowledge gatherers to their role as knowledge sharers with personnel outside the sales unit. The aim is to develop and test a conceptual model to establish how pay-for-performance (economic factor) affects knowledge sharing behaviour under the contingency roles of coworker relationship quality (social psychological factor) and knowledge sharing norms (sociological factor). Design/methodology/approach – Using the Dun & Bradstreet database, the authors collected responses from 374 salespeople in 51 Canadian industrial firms through an on-line survey. The authors used hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) as multiple salespeople were nested within the organization and the data were comprised of individual- and organizational-level constructs. Findings – When there is misalignment between rewards and knowledge sharing behavior, motivational loss hampers knowledge sharing. However, when employees are provided with an environment that fosters high coworker relationship quality and consensual knowledge sharing norms, the motivational loss resulting from the incongruence between pay-for-performance and knowledge sharing behavior is mitigated. Research limitations/implications – Implications regarding how salespeople ' s knowledge sharing contributes to relationship marketing along with practical ramifications for how sales managers can encourage knowledge sharing are discussed. Originality/value – This study contributes to the sales literature (e.g. control, key account management, expanding role of sales) by testing a model that integrates different theoretical perspectives to examine what types of control mechanisms and which combinations of these controls affect salespeople ' s engagement in knowledge sharing behaviors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it