Salesperson knowledge sourcing inside the vendor organization: Examining the performance-relationship continuum given selected boundary conditions
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
Salespeople can gain valuable knowledge from within their own firm to improve performance with customers. Despite this, salespeople's knowledge sourcing from various internal sources and personnel and the relationship of this to performance remains largely unexplored. Following a mixed-methods approach, Study 1 employs qualitative investigation to outline the distinct types of knowledge salespeople source from three distinct internal groups, namely (i) sales colleagues, (ii) sales managers and the (iii) internal business team (IBT), as well as several contingencies potentially impacting the effectiveness of knowledge-sourcing. To test hypotheses developed from Study 1, Study 2 empirically investigates the performance effects of salespeople sourcing knowledge from sales and non-sales IBT members via B2B salesperson survey data ( n = 211). Results indicate an inverted U-shaped relationship between knowledge sourcing from sales colleagues and salesperson performance, with curvilinear performance-relationships identified in terms of knowledge sourcing from sales managers and the IBT, as these are moderated by market-level variables. The research provides overdue insights on the still little-understood internal dimension of selling, while helping managers determine which knowledge-sourcing they should – and should not – encourage.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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