Brian N. Rutherford, Martha Troncoza, Scott C. Ambrose, Nwamaka Anaza, Ryan Matthews
{"title":"One does not fit all: what is in a salesperson sample?","authors":"Brian N. Rutherford, Martha Troncoza, Scott C. Ambrose, Nwamaka Anaza, Ryan Matthews","doi":"10.1080/08853134.2023.2252610","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractThis study conducts a systematic review of salesperson sampling within the pages of the Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management from 2013 to 2022. A total of 284 papers (all inclusive) were identified in the first step of the review. Next articles were qualified based on article types, methodology (research approach), and respondent type before additional analysis was conducted. This resulted in 109 published manuscripts with 147 unique salesperson samples for further review. Specifically, sample scope and participant profiles were examined based on the 109 articles. The sample scope included response metrics, study deployment, and contextual aspects. Participant profile includes the examination of demographics, experience, work details, and performance. Ensuing the systematic review, managerial importance and implications, best practices, and research insights and future research directions are provided. This includes guidance on the sampling frame overview, data collection, and sample contexts of participants for a better understanding of what information should be included in research studies. In turn, this study puts forth evidence that one type of salesperson sample does not fit all sales research, and the generalizability of the sample should be carefully considered.Keywords: Systematic reviewsalespersonsamplingbest practices Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).","PeriodicalId":16697,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08853134.2023.2252610","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
AbstractThis study conducts a systematic review of salesperson sampling within the pages of the Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management from 2013 to 2022. A total of 284 papers (all inclusive) were identified in the first step of the review. Next articles were qualified based on article types, methodology (research approach), and respondent type before additional analysis was conducted. This resulted in 109 published manuscripts with 147 unique salesperson samples for further review. Specifically, sample scope and participant profiles were examined based on the 109 articles. The sample scope included response metrics, study deployment, and contextual aspects. Participant profile includes the examination of demographics, experience, work details, and performance. Ensuing the systematic review, managerial importance and implications, best practices, and research insights and future research directions are provided. This includes guidance on the sampling frame overview, data collection, and sample contexts of participants for a better understanding of what information should be included in research studies. In turn, this study puts forth evidence that one type of salesperson sample does not fit all sales research, and the generalizability of the sample should be carefully considered.Keywords: Systematic reviewsalespersonsamplingbest practices Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).