The ultimately accountable job: leading today's sales organization

In recent years, sales leaders have had to devote considerable time and energy to establishing and maintaining disciplined processes. The thing is, many of them stop there--and they can't afford to, because the business environment has changed. Customers have gained power and gone global, channels have proliferated, more product companies are selling services, and many suppliers have begun providing a single point of contact for customers. Such changes require today's sales leaders to fill various new roles: Company leader. The best sales chiefs actively help formulate and execute company strategy, and they collaborate with all functions of the business to deliver value to customers. Customer champion. Customers want C-level relationships with suppliers in order to understand product strategy, look at offerings in advance, and participate in decisions made about future products--and sales leaders are in the best position to offer that kind of contact. Process guru. Although sales chiefs must look beyond the sales and customer processes they have honed over the past decade, they can't abandon them. The focus on process has become only more important as many organizations have begun bundling products and services to meet important customers' individual needs. Organization architect. Good sales leaders spend a lot of time evaluating and occasionally redesigning the sales organization's structure to ensure that it supports corporate strategy. Often, this involves finding the right balance between specialized and generalized sales roles. Course corrector. Sales leaders must watch the horizon, but they can't take their hands off the levers or forget about the dials. If they do, they might fail to respond when quick adjustments in priorities are needed.     

Benefiting from dedication and constraint in buyer-seller relationships

This paper contributes to recent calls for studying the effectiveness of relationship-based marketing practices [De Wulf, Odekerken-Schröder, & Iacobucci, 2001; Palmatier, Robert W., Dant, Rajiv P., Grewal, Dhruv, Evans, K.R. (2006), Factors influencing the effectiveness of relationship marketing: A meta-analysis, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70, October, 142-143.] by identifying the influence of relationship investments, personnel competencies, frequency and quality of communication on some selected B2B relationship outcomes. The paper also sheds light on the discussion of the role of contextual factors on relationship development by incorporating the construct of quality of supply alternatives into the hypothesized structural model and empirically testing this model in the context of the transforming Polish economy. The results of research conducted among business customers are used to verify the model using SEM techniques.According to a prior conceptualization [Bendapudi, Neeli, Berry, Leonard L. (1997), “Customers' Motivations for Maintaining Relationships With Service Providers,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 73[1], 15-37.] research suggests that companies operating in B2B markets may benefit from both dedication-based and constraint-based relationships, but the first type of relationships brings more positive outcomes. The widest set of relationship benefits may be achieved by improving the emotional tone of the relationship which is connected mostly with developing competencies of personnel and a high quality of inter-firm communication. Other analyzed marketing practices should be carefully used because they may not lead to expected results. The research results are discussed with regard to prior studies in the area. Some managerial implications, study limitations and suggestions for further research are presented.