Articles, The Interaction of Consumers and Salespersons

Posted on
Articles, The Interaction of Consumers and Salespersons

Articles on The Interaction Between Consumers and Salespersons

In this paper, three articles are being reviewed to understand the interaction between consumers and salespersons and the subsequent issues.

Three Rs of Interpersonal Consumer Guilt Relationship, Reciprocity, Reparation

The first article, Three Rs of Interpersonal Consumer Guilt Relationship, Reciprocity, Reparation is authored by Darren W. Dahl, Heather Honea, and Rajesh V. Manchanda. Dahl is a professor at the University of British Columbia and a specialist in Social Interaction and Marketing. Similarly, Honea is a professor at the San Diego University and a specialist in Integrated Marketing Communication whereas Machanda is a professor at the University of Manitoba and a researcher on Sustainability and Social Marketing. After conducting a thorough research, they assert that “when the interaction with a salesperson establishes social connectedness, failure to make a purchase induces guilt (of consumers)” (Dahl, Honea, & Manchanda, 2005). Also, they have attempted to discover “the behavioral consequences of interpersonally motivated guilt that is experienced in a consumption context” (Dahl, Honea, & Manchanda, 2005).

Norms

Next, the authors elaborate and explain the norm of relationships, reciprocity, and reparation between consumers and salespersons suggesting that after the “social connectedness” between the two, consumers regard their purchase as a pay back to sales. If not, they tend to feel guilty and might produce reparation to salespersons (Dahl, Honea, & Manchanda, 2005). Two studies were made to test their hypothesis and the results revealed that guilt reflected when consumers failed to make a purchase and made future purchases to compensate the salesperson. The significance of this research cannot be ignored as it is one of the first to indicate guilt in the connection between salespersons and consumers. The article explains several issues indicating that guilt may shape consumers’ behavior. However, it still leaves some other questions in the same aspect; how will guilt influence consumers in long term? Will guilt leads the consumers to make reluctant decisions about purchasing from the salesperson?

The Effect of Trust Belief and Salesperson’s Expertise on Consumer’s Intention to Purchase Nutraceuticals

The second article, The Effect of Trust Belief and Salesperson’s Expertise on Consumer’s Intention to Purchase Nutraceuticals: Applying the Theory of Reasoned Action, is written by Business professors – Ming-Tien Tsai, Chao-Wei Chin, and Cheng-Chung Chen. As the title suggests, this article discusses costumer’s inclination of purchasing and how it is related to their personal attitude, advices from people they respect, and the positive relationship they build with the level of advertisement of salespersons. The research provides important information asserting “trust as an antecedent of attitude and subjective norm” (Tsai, Chin, & Chen, 2010). The influence of personal attitude and advices from respective people is also agreed by Hassanein and Head (2007) and Niva & Mäkelä (2005). Moreover, the more knowledgeable the salesperson is in the field, the more likely costumers are going to make the purchase. This research again paved my way in my research as it informs that both social interactions and professional knowledge of salespersons is important in the conversation. However, the authors did not mention how much the consumers are going to trust salespersons from their advertisement. Considering the amount of advertisements we see every day, there are people even today who contradict the feeling of being advertised. Therefore, how will these people influence the positive curve between the talks of salespersons and consumers? Also, in what way will it shape the shopping environment? I expect to find out more information concerning these issues in my field observation.

CALLPLAN model

The third article is based on the research conducted across India, China, Korea, and Philippines and introduces the CALLPLAN model which “was suggested for allocation of sales calls across customers for a given sales force size, structure, and sales territory design” (Sy-Changco, Singh, Gregorio, Lu, & Shin, 2016). It also highlights how sales call length is impacted by salespersons adapting their sales calls (a form of adaptive selling) and the role of a customer’s willingness (Sy-Changco, Singh, Gregorio, Lu, & Shin, 2016). Referring to a previous research, the author points out that Mulcahy suggests only a small percentage of consumers are willing to spend time and feel their conversation with salesperson effective and worthy. However, the authors believe that the sales call length is more related to consumer’s reactions as compared to their conversation. Darmon, in a previous research, supports this assumption. In the article, the authors conclude from their research that “salespeople adapt the length of the sales call according to potential sales” (Sy-Changco, Singh, Gregorio, Lu, & Shin, 2016) as “customer willingness is an important consideration in determining the sales call length” (Sy-Changco, Singh, Gregorio, Lu, Shin, 2016).

Conclusion

This article also supports the two previous articles discussed in this paper stressing that consumers’ willingness is a crucial determinant in their interactions. However, none of the articles mentioned how does the interaction shape consumers’ willingness? All three of the articles are reliable sources as they were data-driven research studies.

References

Dahl, D. W., Honea, H., & Manchanda, R. V. (2005). Three Rs of Interpersonal Consumer Guilt: Relationship, Reciprocity, Reparation. Journal of Consumer Psychology,15(4), 307-315. doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1504_5

Sy-Changco, J. A., Singh, R., Gregorio, R. L., Lu, P., & Shin, G. (2016). Impact of Sales Call Adaptiveness and Customer Willingness on Sales Call Length: A Cross-Country Study of India, China, Korea, and Philippines. Journal of Global Marketing,29(3), 128-138. doi:10.1080/08911762.2016.1171940