As discussed in Chapter 2, many o f the constructs in Study 1 should be measured in the context in which they are employed (i.e. selling). Intuition and emotional intelligence has been described as context dependent (Epstein, 2010; Kidwell et al., 2011 respectfully) because much of human knowledge and experiences are encoded into memory in the form of context-specific concrete mental representations (e.g., images, scenarios, affect, and physical sensations) (Epstein, 2010). Any study of intuition must be contextualized because specific situational cues can automatically activate past experiences that result in an intuitive feeling of knowing (Volz & Cramon, 2006). Also, Kidwell et al. (2011) introduced the need for a domain specific measure of Emotional Intelligence; arguing that some people will have high EI in one setting and low EI in another. Therefore, all measures used in Study 1 of this dissertation are in a sales context. To accomplish this, any construct that is not contextually context specific is adapted into a selling context that keeps the intended meaning, while placing the respondent in a selling frame of mind. Table 3.2 shows the transformation from domain general to a domain specific construct for both Epstein et al.’s (1996) 5-item faith in intuition (FI) scale and one additional item that is added by the researcher (during the sales process, I rely on my intuition). Also in Table 3.2 is Norris and Epstein’s (2011) 12-item rational (deliberation) (DEL) scale. Both faith in intuition and deliberation are measured using a 7-point Likert type with end points strongly agree to strongly disagree.
Table 3.2
Item Transformation into Selling Context
Construct Measures Before Adaption Measures After Adaption
Faith in
I listen to my hunches during a sales call
My initial impressions of
customers are almost always right.
When it comes to dealing with customers, I can usually rely on my
"gut feelings."
I can usually feel when a customer is positive or negative even if I can't explain how I know.
When selling, I don’t like to have to do a lot of thinking.
During a sales call, reasoning things out carefully is not one of my strong points.
When interacting with customers, I am not a very analytical thinker.
I try to avoid selling situations that require thinking in-depth about something.
I am much better at figuring out selling activities logically than most other sales people.__________
Table 3.2 (Continued)
103
I have a logical mind. When dealing with customers, I have a logical mind.
Using logic usually works best for me in figuring out how to approach customer problems.
Note: all bolded items where add by the researcher and was not part o f the original scale.
The constructs of emotional intelligence, creative selling and job performance (behavioral and outcome) are sales context specific and thus do not need any adaptation.
The four dimensions of emotional intelligence, emotional perception (3 items), emotional understanding (4 items), and emotional regulation (4 items), that are used to test Joseph and Newmans (2010) cascading model along with facilitation of emotion (4 items) are measured using Kidwell’s et al, (2011) Emotional Intelligence in Marketing Exchanges (EIME) scale. Since the EIME is an objective, higher order construct, each of the four dimensions are measured by calculating a score for each item within each dimension and then summed. The dimension scores are based on weighs that were developed by expert judges (see Kidwell et al., 201 lfor more details). Creative selling is measured using Wang and Netemeyer’s (2004) 7-item scale of Salesperson Creative Performance (SCP) and measured on a 5-point Likert type scale with endpoints of practically never to almost always. Job performance consists of two dimensions, a behavioral and outcome performance, both measured using an adapted version of Behrman and Perreault (1982) as was done by Miao and Evans (2007). Behavioral and outcome performance both consists of four items and is measured on a 7-point Likert
type scale with end points of strongly agree to strongly disagree. The survey used in Study 1 and all items included can be found in the Appendix 1.
Study 1 is a descriptive research design using a survey methodology with a sample consisting o f business-to-business salespeople. The sample is obtained using a national online panel source (Qualtrics). At the beginning of the survey, all respondents agreed to the IRB statement informing them that all responses are anonymous and confidential before entering the survey. The sample consists of business to business salespeople employed in the United States with at least two years of total selling experience. In addition, respondents are screened for their ability to employ creative selling techniques in their present sales position. That is, the respondents must have the latitude to use various creative selling techniques in their jobs. For this reason, sales people who are required to follow a certain sales format or script were excluded from the study. To make sure that respondents meet these requirements, filter questions placed at the beginning of the survey screening out any respondent who did not meet the criteria. In addition, respondents who reported the use of their mobile phones in taking the survey were screened out.
Analysis is conducted using structural equation modeling (SEM) and uses the two stage approach as outlined by Hair, Black, Babin, and Anderson (2010). First, a measurement model was subjected to a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The appropriateness of the CFA model is assessed using a combination of a chi-square test and other Goodness-Of-Fit indices, along with construct validity and reliability. The process and suggested cut off levels recommended by Hair et al., (2010) are used. Once the confirmatory factor analysis demonstrates adequate fit, the second stage of the
105
process, the structural model is tested. Once the structural model demonstrates adequate fit, the path relationships are assessed, for both of the competing models. A chi-square difference test is used to determine which o f the competing models best fits the data.
From the results o f the structural model, conclusions and inferences are drawn.
These results help shed light on the research questions. The full analysis o f the research questions contained a combination of results and interpretation of both studies.
However, Study 1 specifically provides insight into all of the research questions:
Research Question 1: How does emotional intelligence fit into the decision making process and is there a distinction between a salesperson’s intuition and emotional perception? The results of Study 1 provided insight into the relationship between intuition and emotional perception and intuition and emotional understanding.
Additional insight is gained from the chi-square test comparing the two models.
Research Question 2: What is the relationship between intuition and deliberation? The results of the structural model provide insight into the relationship between intuition and deliberation. This addressed questions such as, is intuition an antecedent to deliberation or is it a mediating variable to creative selling and/or job performance (behavioral and outcome)?
Research Question 3: What are the antecedents to effective creative selling?
Study 1 helped determine the antecedents to creative selling. The relationship with emotional regulation, deliberation and intuition helped determine what kind of person effectively implements creative selling performance. Also, by examining the structural model, the results demonstrate whether creative selling leads to behavioral and or outcome job performance; or does it play a moderating role? These results answer the
call from Wang and Netemeyer (2004) for research on creative selling’s antecedents and outcomes, and answer Evans et al.’s (2012) call for research on creativity within selling.
Research Question 4: What are the predictors o f job performance in the context of an intuitive decision-making model? The structural model provided insight into are the direct antecedents of behavioral and outcome job performance or are there some combination of mediating variables to both types job performance? Will a salesperson’s faith in their intuition have a direct influence on behavioral and job performance outcome, or does it work through deliberation and/or creative selling? This provided insight into the role o f the automatic intuitive process and how it affects both behavioral and outcome job performance.