Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a conceptual framework of salesperson satisfaction/dissatisfaction (SS/D) formation processes. Based on past research in organizational behavior and sales management, the proposed SS/D formation model accounts for various motivation theories and specifies the roles of such intervening variables as salespersons ’ expectations, disconfirmations, attributions, and equity perceptions. The model also accounts for the dynamic nature of the relationships among salespersons ’ efforts, performance, intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, and job satisfaction/dissatisfaction. An attempt is made at explaining some generally observed discrepancies between empirical observations and theoretical expectations. The proposed conceptual framework suggests that several relationships may be more complex than the simple links hypothesized in the literature. Some testable research hypotheses are derived from the proposed conceptual framework. Job satisfaction has been widely studied in organizational behavior and sales force research (Bagozzi 1980a, b; Brown and Peterson 1993; 1994; Donavan et al. 2004). This interest has been entertained by management’s belief that satisfied salespersons are likely to be more committed to
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".