MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083731508 · doi:10.1108/jm2-02-2014-0014

Salesperson profitability in relationship marketing

2014· article· en· W2083731508 on OpenAlexaff
Saïd Echchakoui

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Modelling in Management · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexMarketingCustomer lifetime valueTransaction costValue (mathematics)BusinessOriginalityRelationship marketingCustomer profitabilityPortfolioInvestment (military)MicroeconomicsEconomicsCustomer retentionMarketing managementComputer scienceFinanceQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – This paper aims to answer a prominent question that arises for the manager who wishes to recruit a salesperson to maintain and develop a portfolio–customer relationship: Under which condition is this decision profitable for the firm? Though several authors have underscored the importance of the salesperson's role in the creation of purchaser–salesperson relationships, in the author's knowledge, no study has focused on the salesperson's profitability in the relationship approach. This issue is significant for sales managers because the investment in sales force is greater, and the relationship profitability with customers is not guaranteed. Design/methodology/approach – Econometric model based on transaction cost economics theory and dynamic exchange between firm, salesperson and a customer. Specifically, this model links between customer life value, firm financial value, salesperson cost and relationship time. Findings – Three zones are identified that can characterize the dynamic salesperson profitability. It was shown that only one zone can be profitable to the firm. Research limitations/implications – This result is important because it can solve the equivocal posit between scholars with regard to the success or the failure of relationship marketing. This study also specifies the critical retention rate, the critical duration time in which a salesperson begins to be profitable. Originality/value – In the author's knowledge, this study is the first to use an exchange model to show in which conditions the salesperson will be profitable in relationship marketing.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Modelling in ManagementSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207