Journal of Business Research 142 (2022) 585–593

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres

Linking B2B sales performance to entrepreneurial self-efficacy,

entrepreneurial selling actions
John Edwards a, *, Morgan P. Miles b, Steven D’Alessandro c, Mark Frost a
a
School of Management and Marketing, Charles Sturt University, N.S.W. Australia
b
School of Agriculture and Food Sciences, University of Queensland, Australia
c
School of Management and Marketing, University of Tasmania, Australia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This study addresses the interrelationships between a business-to-business (B2B) salesperson’s sales performance
B2B selling and their level of entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial sales actions. Data was collected through a
Sales performance survey of 252 participants (B2B salespeople working in Australia). Structured equation modeling was used to
Entrepreneurial self-efficacy
analyze and test the hypotheses. The findings suggest that entrepreneurial self-efficacy strongly influences sales
Creative selling
Sales innovativeness
innovativeness and creative selling, highlighting the importance of senior management encouraging and
rewarding new selling methods (a salesperson’s entrepreneurial actions). Finally, these sales actions positively
and significantly impacted individual sales performance. Thus, creative selling and sales innovativeness are
powerful influencers of personal sales performance. This research contributes to the sales performance literature
by highlighting the relationship between entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE), creative selling, and sales innova-
tiveness. These findings provide additional lessons for senior management when pursuing increased growth and
sales performance. As ESE has a positive impact on a salesperson’s actions and performance, senior management
may wish to encourage an internal environment in which ESE behaviors are not only accepted but encouraged.

1. Introduction business-to-business (B2B) marketers (Bag et al., 2021). Therefore,

entrepreneurship, which focuses on leveraging, advantage seeking,
This study examines the interrelationships between entrepreneurial proactiveness, risk acceptance, and innovativeness to create and exploit
self-efficacy, entrepreneurial selling actions, and individual business-to- attractive economic opportunities, has become a popular prescription
business (B2B) sales performance. Research conducted on the anteced- for revitalizing a firm’s business (Covin & Miles, 1999; Wales et al.,
ents of B2B sales performance only explains a small amount of the 2020). As Wang et al. (2020, p. 262) suggest, “salespeople who can
variances in salesperson performance (Bolander et al., 2015; Plouffe embrace the decision-making processes and behaviors of effective en-
et al., 2014). The research has also neglected the possible role of trepreneurs will be high performers.”
entrepreneurship approaches in explaining and improving B2B sales Scholars’ early work suggested that marketing functions such as sales
performance. The purpose of this study is to explore the overall research and entrepreneurship were interrelated (Hills, 1987; Jones et al., 2000;
question: Miles & Arnold, 1991; Morris et al., 1990; Murray, 1981; Weeks &
What are the interrelationships between individual sales perfor- Kahle, 1990a, 1990b). For example, Morris et al. (1990, p. 3) noted that
mance in a B2B context and: (i) entrepreneurial self-efficacy and (ii) while
entrepreneurial sales actions?
“…a growing body of anecdotal and empirical research substantiates the
The prime role of the sales function is to generate revenue (Verbeke
importance of entrepreneurship for established firms…such general find-
et al., 2011). Therefore, it is a primary concern and priority for firms,
ings provide little guidance in terms of the application of entrepreneurship
mainly operating in competitive business-to-business (B2B) markets
to specific functional areas within firms. One of the most critical of these
(Evans et al., 2012; Verbeke et al., 2011). Furthermore, rational
functions in today’s corporation is sales.”
decision-making processes are becoming increasingly critical to

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jcpedwards@icloud.com (J. Edwards), morgan.miles@uq.edu.au (M.P. Miles), steve.dalessandro@utas.edu.au (S. D’Alessandro), mfrost@csu.
edu.au (M. Frost).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.074
Received 26 May 2021; Received in revised form 26 December 2021; Accepted 29 December 2021
Available online 13 January 2022
0148-2963/Crown Copyright © 2022 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
J. Edwards et al. Journal of Business Research 142 (2022) 585–593

Nevertheless, minimal work remains on how an entrepreneurial entrepreneurial self-efficacy – sales performance relationship (Peterson,
perspective impacts the individual sales functional-level actions and 2019). Peterson concluded that the lack of consistency in measuring
performance by either marketing or entrepreneurship scholars (Mat- entrepreneurial self-efficacy and its connection to sales performance
thews et al., 2018). impeded understanding of these constructs and their relationship. Apart
B2B sales performance is a complex variable to predict. Much of the from ESE scales developed by Chen et al. (1998), other self-reported
sales performance research to date has identified variables that only instruments have been developed to measure individual entrepre-
account for a small percentage of variance (e.g., 10% to 20%) in B2B neurial self-efficacy. For example, Zhao et al. (2005) developed the ESE
salesperson performance (Bolander et al., 2015; Evans et al., 2012; scale targeted at individuals conducting entrepreneurial tasks and
Verbeke et al., 2011; Zallocco et al., 2009). This has motivated some actions.
scholars to use entrepreneurship frameworks and concepts to analyze
and test these entrepreneurial variable effects on B2B sales performance 2.2. Entrepreneurial sales actions
(Evans et al., 2012; Matthews et al., 2018). Individuals thinking and
acting entrepreneurially within organizations have become essential for Entrepreneurial actions can lead to positive firm outcomes (Hornsby
senior management (Hisrich et al., 2007). In the context of investigating et al., 2009; Sproul et al., 2019). However, the readiness of the sales staff
B2B sales performance, the entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) construct to display entrepreneurial actions needs to be realistically assessed.
plays a crucial role in whether individuals engage in entrepreneurial Therefore, management must support measures to enhance employees’
behavior and actions (Miao et al., 2017; Newman et al., 2019). creativity and innovation skills (Kuratko, 2017). Entrepreneurial actions
Entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) refers to an individual’s belief in typically used by B2B salespeople in a corporate environment include
their capability to perform tasks and roles aimed at entrepreneurial creative selling (Wang & Netemeyer, 2004) and sales innovativeness
outcomes (Chen et al., 1998). Researchers have investigated the rela- (Matsuo, 2009). These two critical entrepreneurial sales actions are now
tionship between ESE and individual outcomes, such as entrepreneurial further explained.
intentions, emotions, and actions (Zhao et al., 2005). Scholars have also
examined the relationship between ESE and firm performance outcomes 2.3. Creative selling
(Miao et al., 2017). There has been a large body of ESE research, but few
studies directly related to individual sales performance (Miao et al., Creative selling refers to the number and type of new ideas gener-
2017; Newman et al., 2019). ated, as demonstrated by the salesperson (Wang & Netemeyer, 2004). It
Thus, this study seeks to explore the impact of entrepreneurship on also refers to identifying problems and considering and reviewing op-
sales by examining the relationships between the dimensions of entre- tions through creativity (Groza et al., 2016). Employee creativity is also
preneurial self-efficacy (ESE), entrepreneurial sales actions, and sales- about developing ideas about practices, procedures, products, and novel
person performance grounded on the rational (or bounded rational) and beneficial services (Coelho et al., 2011).
decision-making framework of B2B procurement processes (Hadji- Early studies investigating creativity in work environments revealed
khani & LaPlaca, 2013). The study articulates how a B2B salesperson’s the importance of management support, resources, time availability,
level of ESE may impact their implementation of entrepreneurial sales and rewards (Amabile et al., 1996). Creativity is a powerful tool for
actions (i.e., creative selling and sales innovativeness) and, ultimately, individuals seeking to develop new ideas that result in innovations for
their individual sales performance. Key entrepreneurial actions and the firm (Sawyer, 2006). Employee creativity is found at the individual
activities typically used by salespeople in a corporate business envi- level in generating ideas, but surprisingly, creativity is considered an
ronment include creative selling and sales innovativeness (Matsuo, influential yet under-researched area in the sales performance literature
2009; Wang & Netemeyer, 2004). Creative selling refers to the number (Evans et al., 2012; Locander et al., 2018).
and type of new ideas generated, as demonstrated by the salesperson A salesperson is deemed creative when they generate and evaluate
(Wang & Netemeyer, 2004). Sales innovativeness is the flexibility and new solutions to current problems, look at problem-solving from a
willingness to accept new problem-solving methods (Matsuo, 2009). different perspective, and take the initiative to fix existing difficulties
Individual B2B sales performance can be based on objective financial (Miao & Wang, 2016). Salespeople who engage in creative selling find
measures, such as revenue, profit, return on investment, and non- new ways of prospecting and make innovative presentations (Groza
financial measures like customer satisfaction (Zallocco et al., 2009). et al., 2016). If the organization values innovation, salespeople will
Data was collected from 252 B2B salespeople working in large likely generate creative ideas during the selling process, consistent with
Australian firms from June to September 2020. Participants responded the organizational expectations and reward systems (Wang & Miao,
to a 56-item online survey, and the results were analyzed using Partial 2015). Without corporate support, salespeople view creative selling as
Least Squares – Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). too risky and thus outside of acceptable sales practices (Wang & Miao,
2015). A firm’s willingness to customize product/service offerings may
2. Theoretical framework play an essential role in encouraging creative selling (Martins & Ter-
blanche, 2003). If firms are unwilling to customize offerings, salespeople
2.1. Entrepreneurial self-efficacy may feel limited in generating new ideas when solving customer prob-
lems (Martins & Terblanche, 2003). The subjective perceptions held by
Entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) refers to an individual’s belief in salespeople of the organization’s acceptance of corporate entrepre-
their capability to perform tasks and roles aimed at entrepreneurial neurship play a crucial role in their creative exchanges (Runco, 2014).
outcomes (Chen et al., 1998; McGee & Peterson, 2019; Zhao et al., Salesperson creativity has a more substantial positive effect on sales
2005). Bandura’s (1997) work on self-efficacy helps us understand an performance when the salesperson engages in customer-directed
entrepreneur’s action-related beliefs (Frese, 2009). behavior (Miao & Wang, 2016). In addition, a recent study found that
The most widely used approach in measuring self-efficacy in per- a firm’s willingness to customize solutions and a department’s inclina-
sonal selling research is adopting multicategory rating scales. Partici- tion to innovate provided a platform to empower salesforce creative
pants are required to rate themselves on performing specific sales- behaviors and actions (Locander et al., 2018). Using the Wang and
related tasks (Peterson, 2019). For example, items such as “I am good Netemeyer (2004) instrument, these authors found that creative selling
at selling.” However, most personal selling studies have adapted general can positively affect a salesperson’s performance. Thus, the following
self-efficacy scales with little justification (Peterson, 2019). Interest- hypothesis is proposed:
ingly, while sales performance has been widely studied as a dependent H1. A positive relationship exists between entrepreneurial self-efficacy
variable (e.g., Verbeke et al., 2011), very little has been done on the and creative selling.

586
J. Edwards et al. Journal of Business Research 142 (2022) 585–593

2.4. Sales innovativeness personal selling, create new markets for new products using effectual
instead of causal reasoning (Read et al., 2009). The entrepreneur pri-
Sales innovativeness is the flexibility and willingness to accept new marily does the sales function in entrepreneurial firms, usually serving
problem-solving methods (Matsuo, 2009). This may result in new as the organization’s chief salesperson. More recently, Evans et al.
products or services or changes to sales processes using technology. It is (2012) acknowledged that entrepreneurial activities such as creativity,
argued that creativeness is the first step of the innovation process, and innovativeness, and marshaling resources are essential to understanding
innovation is strongly related to the primary forms of corporate entre- sales performance.
preneurship, venturing, and strategic renewal (Coelho et al., 2011; The market intelligence dimension of the sales function makes the
Covin & Miles, 2007). salesperson critical for entrepreneurial initiatives (Morris et al., 1990).
In a B2B sales environment, sales innovativeness reflects the extent Likewise, effective salespeople are often entrepreneurial (Jones et al.,
to which salespeople perceive their organization as being flexible and 2000). The salesperson who facilitates expediting a shipment, acceler-
their willingness to consider new approaches to problem-solving (Evans ating invoicing, committing to prompt installation, or performing
et al., 2007). Salespeople may need to try new methods to acquire new various other deliverables, often gains the customer’s confidence and, in
clients and retain existing customers as competition between sellers is turn, becomes a trusted partner in future exchanges (Steward et al.,
usually intense in a B2B selling context (Evans et al., 2007). In studies 2010).
involving selling new products, innovativeness at the firm level has been Salespeople are generally highly entrepreneurial in behavior,
an influential factor for salespeople as new products may require new exhibiting high levels of autonomy, proactiveness, and risk-taking (De
approaches and methods (Evans et al., 2007; Robinson et al., 2005). It Jong et al., 2011). Interestingly, salespeople usually are among the
has also been found that sales departments tend to be more innovative direct subordinates of senior management and potential corporate en-
when salespeople are evaluated based on their behavior and actions trepreneurs. The key account manager has been labeled a “corporate
rather than outcomes (Matsuo, 2009). These entrepreneurial actions entrepreneur” by Sengupta et al. (2000). The higher the entrepreneurial
where a sales professional proactively innovates may significantly skill of the salesperson, the greater the trust with customers, which is an
contribute to the overall value of their customer’s satisfaction, and essential factor for B2B selling (Sengupta et al., 2000).
therefore the salesperson’s performance.
Based on these lines of reasoning, the following hypothesis is 2.7. Entrepreneurial selling and routine selling
proposed:
H2. A positive relationship exists between entrepreneurial self-efficacy Researchers have identified two different selling activities, entre-
and sales innovativeness. preneurial and routine selling, based on the importance of effort and
time (Dalecki, 2019; Matthews et al., 2018; Weeks & Kahle, 1990a).
2.5. Sales performance Routine selling and entrepreneurial selling differ in several ways. When
salespeople are involved in routine selling, the client relationship is
Sales performance is the goal of any business organization, be it usually stable, and their needs are relatively well known (Weeks &
through top-level revenue or bottom-line profit. In effect, it is the result Kahle, 1990a). Based on their current knowledge and abilities, the
of creative selling and sales innovativeness. Salesforce performance has salesperson essentially applies established processes and procedures to
been widely acknowledged as a vital research area and is critical to the the current situation. Alternatively, entrepreneurial selling involves
success of nearly every organization (Verbeke et al., 2011). However, creating new markets and new customers (Dalecki, 2019; Matthews
sales scholars have had varying degrees of success in examining factors et al., 2018). Entrepreneurial selling consists in developing and planning
influencing B2B sales performance (Evans et al., 2012; Verbeke et al., sales calls, refining sales tactics, and learning about industry and orga-
2011). Past B2B sales performance studies have confirmed that the nization trends. Routine selling primarily involves implementing sales
following factors have a positive effect on sales performance: customer strategies that previously have succeeded, whereas entrepreneurial
orientation (Franke & Park, 2006), adaptive selling (McFarland, 2019), selling requires revising or developing new strategies (Weeks & Kahle,
learning orientation (Sujan et al., 1994), goal-orientated (Silver et al., 1990a). For example, B2B customers targeted for entrepreneurial selling
2006), technical expertise (Verbeke et al., 2011), and intrinsic motiva- would be highly involved in a vital new task purchase, while customers
tion (Bodla & Naeem, 2014). However, the research has not detected nor targeted for routine selling would be engaged in a modified or straight
accounted for any new B2B sales performance drivers across complex rebuy purchase (Dalecki, 2019; Matthews et al., 2018; Weeks & Kahle,
selling contexts (Verbeke et al., 2011). 1990a).
Sales performance is affected by variables such as the underlying In this study, the sample comprises corporations that employ B2B
role, motivation, competence and ability, individual characteristics, salespeople to develop and sell technical and complex products and
organizational elements, internal and external environments, skill services. They work with customers and technical staff to create and
levels, the salesperson’s behaviors, sales technology, personality, inter- deliver complex products with a long sales cycle. As a result, the value of
organizational relationships, attitude, and knowledge (Evans et al., the products is significant to the firm, reflecting the customer lifetime
2012; Zallocco et al., 2009). However, the variances in B2B sales per- value concept (Gupta et al., 2006; Lemon et al., 2001).
formance studies have been relatively low (i.e., 10% to 20%) (Bolander Creative selling may positively influence individual sales perfor-
et al. 2015; Evans et al., 2012). These findings suggest that much of what mance, enhancing the sales process’s results (Evans et al., 2012; Plouffe,
drives sales performance is still unknown – a crucial motivator for this 2018). To succeed in highly competitive markets, salespeople need to
research (Evans et al., 2012; Plouffe, 2018). create and participate in problem-solving activities (Agnihotri et al.,
2014; Wang & Netemeyer, 2004). Previous research finds that creative
2.6. Entrepreneurship and sales performance selling positively affects a salesperson’s performance and customer
problem-solving (Agnihotri et al., 2014; Wang & Miao, 2015; Wang &
Morris et al. (1990) argued that selling is intrinsically entrepre- Netemeyer, 2004). Furthermore, creative selling is also positively linked
neurial. Indeed, the two functions are similar. Both involve managing with behavioral and outcome performance (Locander et al., 2018).
uncertainty (Baron, 2004; Ulaga & Kohli, 2018) and navigating dynamic However, despite these findings, a salesperson’s creativity is one of the
and complex environments (Hartmann et al., 2018; Schindehutte & under-researched areas of sales performance (Evans et al., 2012). Thus,
Morris, 2009). However, entrepreneurs and salespeople play different the following hypothesis is proposed:
roles requiring various skills (Morris et al., 2005; Rapp & Beeler, 2021). H3. A positive relationship exists between creative selling and individual
For example, entrepreneurial firms’ marketing activities, including sales performance.

587
J. Edwards et al. Journal of Business Research 142 (2022) 585–593

The second component of entrepreneurial sales actions is sales salesperson’s level of entrepreneurial self-efficacy, entrepreneurial sales
innovativeness, which may positively influence individual sales perfor- actions (creative selling and sales innovativeness), and individual sales
mance (Wang & Netemeyer, 2004). Individual sales performance is performance. In addition, control variable data (gender, educational
primarily measured by using quantitative variables, such as sales growth attainment, years with the firm, years in the current role, age group, and
(Spillecke & Brettel, 2013), sales volume (Evans et al., 2012), and sales industry group) were also collected. The constructs were measured using
value (Verbeke et al., 2011). Earlier studies have argued that innovation a five-point Likert scale. The items (or variables) measuring the con-
is positively related to a firm’s financial performance (Han et al., 1998; structs have been drawn from published entrepreneurship and sales
Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). Researchers have also argued the importance of literature (See Table 1). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) was
innovativeness for firm growth (Dess & Lumpkin, 2005). measured by the Zhao et al. (2005) four-item scale. Creative selling was
Sales innovativeness has been positively related to salespeople’s job measured by the Wang and Netemeyer (2004) seven-item scale, while
satisfaction but was not significantly related to outcome performance sales innovativeness was measured using the Matsuo (2009) six-item
(Evans et al., 2007). However, Matsuo’s (2009) study found that sales scale. Finally, the Jones et al. (2007) seven-item scale measured the
innovativeness positively affects sales performance. It is also found that individual sales performance.
the level of entrepreneurial orientation of the sales department impacts
its performance (Spillecke & Brettel, 2013). Furthermore, studies have 4. Results
recently seen a positive link between innovation and sales performance
(Plouffe et al., 2016). Also, entrepreneurial behaviors and activities such 4.1. Construct Reliability and validity
as innovativeness are worthy undertakings for salespeople (Amyx et al.,
2016). Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed: The internal consistency demonstrates the reliability of a scale
H4. A positive relationship exists between sales innovativeness and indi- among items measuring it (Hair et al., 2019). A scale is reliable when its
vidual sales performance. Cronbach’s alpha or composite reliability is more than 0.70 (Fornell &
Fig. 1 illustrates the conceptualized relationships between the con- Larcker, 1981). Table 1 indicates that all measures used in the study
structs in this study. exhibit sufficient reliability.
Likewise, convergent validity is indicated by the average variance
3. Research methods extracted (AVE) of the scales, and in this study, all scales exhibit an AVE
that exceeded 0.5 (as illustrated in Table 1). The square root of AVE
3.1. Sample indicates discriminant validity for all constructs exceeding the correla-
tions between constructs, as indicated in Table 2 (Fornell & Larcker,
This study, part of a more extensive project done during the 2020 1981). In addition, collinearity between the variables was tested. All
COVID-19 pandemic, focuses on the actions and initiatives of the B2B constructs exhibited a variance inflation factor (VIF) of between 1.60
salesforce in a judgment sample of 302 participants drawn from 48 (sales innovativeness) and 2.57 (ESE), with an average VIF of 1.92.
publicly listed Australian corporations that indicated an explicit interest These results are well within the suggested acceptable range of 3.3 or
in leveraging entrepreneurship as a sales growth initiative. lower and suggest that neither multicollinearity nor standard bias is
Overall, 252 completed surveys were received, achieving a response material (Kock, 2015).
rate of 83.4%. The B2B salesperson working in large firms was the unit Models higher in the goodness of fit (GoF) explain latent constructs,
of analysis. which have good measurement properties, and predict well (Tenenhaus
et al., 2005). Generally, the models with a GoF less than 0.1 have a poor
model fit, equal to or above 0.25, showing a medium or acceptable fit,
3.2. Instruments while a good model fit is a GoF equal to or above 0.36 (Wetzels et al.,
2009). The GoF indices of this model were 0.51, which indicates a good
A structured questionnaire was used to gather data from the partic- fit between the data and the theoretical constructs.
ipants. The questionnaire consisted of 24 items regarding the

Fig. 1. The Conceptual Model.

588
J. Edwards et al. Journal of Business Research 142 (2022) 585–593

Table 1 Table 3
Construct Reliability. Hypothesis Testing Results.
Variables Hypothesis Description of Path Std. β Conclusion

Scale and Items: Standardized factor loadings L W Mean SD H1 ESE → Creative Selling 0.71** Supported
(L) and Weights (W) of latent constructs H2 ESE → Sales Innovativeness 0.61** Supported
Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy H3 Creative selling → Sales Performance 0.42** Supported
(4 items): Cronbach Alpha = 0.85: Composite H4 Sales Innovativeness → Sales 0.21** Supported
Reliability = 0.90: AVE = 0.70 Performance
I’m confident I am able to think creatively 0.86 0.34 3.99 0.93 R2 Creative Selling = 0.51, R2 Sales Innovativeness = 0.38, R2 Sales Performance =
I’m confident I can create new products and 0.85 0.36 3.22 1.26 0.30
services
I’m confident I’m able to identify new business 0.73 0.33 4.27 0.83 Notes: ** p < 0.01, R2 = R-squared values.
opportunities
I’m confident that I will be successful in innovativeness) to individual sales performance. Based on the construct
commercializing an idea
verification (see Table 1), a structural equation model using PLS 6.0 was
or creating a new venture or a new development 0.89 0.39 3.60 1.09
Creative Selling used to examine these hypothesized direct paths (Kock, 2019). There is a
(7 items): Cronbach Alpha = 0.82: Composite positive and significant relationship between ESE and creative selling (β
Reliability = 0.87: AVE = 0.59 = 0.71, p-value < 0.01), supporting H1. There is also a positive and
I make business development/sales presentations 0.54 0.24 3.46 1.00 significant relationship between ESE and sales innovativeness (β = 0.61,
in innovative ways
I carry out sales tasks in ways that are resourceful 0.69 0.24 3.87 0.84
p-value < 0.01), supporting H2. Furthermore, there is a significant and
I always come up with new ideas for satisfying 0.83 0.28 3.80 0.85 positive relationship between creative selling and sales performance (β
customer needs = 0.42, p-value < 0.01), supporting H3. Finally, it also appears that
I’m always generating and evaluating multiple 0.76 0.26 3.75 0.91 there was a significant and positive relationship between sales innova-
alternatives for novel customer problems
tiveness and sales performance (β = 0.21, p-value < 0.01), which sup-
I develop fresh perspectives on old problems 0.81 0.28 3.82 0.83
I improvise the methods for solving a problem 0.70 0.24 3.87 0.81 ports H4.
when an answer is not apparent We can conclude from the hypotheses tested that the overall model is
I’m always generating creative selling ideas 0.79 0.27 3.47 0.99 significant and positive. Creative selling has high explanatory power (R2
Sales Innovativeness = 0.51); sales innovativeness also has a medium to high explanatory
(6 items): Cronbach Alpha = 0.91: Composite
Reliability = 0.92: AVE = 0.71
power (R2 = 0.38); and individual sales performance has a medium to
Our ability to function creatively is respected by 0.77 0.22 3.54 0.96 high explanatory power (R2 = 0.30) (Henseler et al., 2016). These re-
the leadership team sults are significant as it has been difficult to explain more than 10% to
Creativity is respected here 0.89 0.25 3.50 1.10 20% of the variance in a salesperson’s performance in previous sales
Around here, people are allowed to try to solve the 0.82 0.23 3.49 1.06
performance studies (Bolander et al., 2015). These relationships are
same problems in different ways
This organization can be described as flexible and 0.88 0.25 3.38 1.24 illustrated in Fig. 2.
continually adapting to change
This organization is open and responsive to 0.85 0.24 3.38 1.20 5. Discussion, implications, limitations, and future research
change
The reward system here encourages innovation 0.81 0.30 3.09 1.24
Sales Performance (Individual)
5.1. Discussion
(7 items): Cronbach Alpha = 0.89: Composite
Reliability = 0.92: AVE = 0.61 Sales performance is an essential function for a business. However, as
Contributing to your company’s acquiring a good 0.75 0.18 3.77 0.73 assessed by the salesperson, the interrelationships between B2B sales
market share
performance and entrepreneurial self-efficacy have received minimal
Selling high-profit margin products 0.77 0.18 3.67 0.84
Generating a high level of dollar sales 0.86 0.20 3.77 0.87 attention. Previous attention on sales performance has primarily focused
Quickly generating sales of new company 0.78 0.18 3.47 0.81 on a salesperson’s adaptive selling behavior and customer orientation.
products However, since the seminal determinants of B2B sales performance
Identifying major accounts in your territory and 0.81 0.19 3.71 0.87 study conducted by Churchill et al. (1985), the ability to predict and
selling them
Exceeding your sales targets 0.77 0.18 3.71 0.90
explain meaningful variances is disappointingly low (Verbeke et al.,
Assisting your sales supervisor/manager to meet 0.73 0.17 3.92 0.80 2011). Generally, sales performance models explain 10% to 20% of the
his or her goals variance; however, there is still an opportunity to explain more
Note: SD = Standard Deviation; AVE = Average Variance Extracted.
(Bolander et al., 2015). This study extends the literature by addressing
and applying entrepreneurial theories and approaches to B2B sales
performance to meet this challenge.
Table 2 The hypotheses demonstrated high explanatory power, with entre-
Correlations between Constructs. preneurial self-efficacy and its related effects with creative selling,
Construct ESE SI CS SP explaining a high level of variance (R2 = 0.51). This study offers solid
empirical evidence that entrepreneurial self-efficacy can explain 38% of
Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE) 0.84 0.61 0.71 0.47
Sales Innovativeness (SI) 0.61 0.84 0.46 0.36
the variance to sales innovativeness. Also, both these entrepreneurial
Creative Selling (CS) 0.71 0.46 0.76 0.49 sales actions, sales innovativeness, and creative selling were a medium
Sales Performance (SP) 0.47 0.36 0.49 0.78 to strong predictor of individual sales performance (R2 = 30%). The
Note: The square roots of average variances extracted (AVE) are shown on di-
results highlight the importance of identifying and developing entre-
agonal in bold. N = 252. All correlations were significant at p < 0.01. preneurial self-efficacy among B2B salespeople, and creative selling and
sales innovativeness improve sales performance. These entrepreneurial
sales actions need to be sufficiently encouraged and assessed, particu-
4.2. Hypothesis Testing
larly with B2B salespeople at the middle level of an organization
(Hornsby et al., 2002; Kuratko, 2017). These findings give rise to a range
Table 3 illustrates the standardized coefficients of the path from ESE
of theoretical and practical insights.
to entrepreneurial sales actions (creative selling and sales

589
J. Edwards et al. Journal of Business Research 142 (2022) 585–593

Fig. 2. Path Model Results.

5.2. Theoretical implications example, the study finds that ESE has a positive impact on a sales-
person’s actions and performance, then the senior management may
This study contributes empirical evidence to understand how ESE wish to encourage an environment in which ESE behaviors are not only
impacts salespersons’ entrepreneurial actions (i.e., creative selling and accepted but encouraged. This may involve creating a workplace envi-
sales innovativeness) and individual sales performance from a B2B ronment where market and product ideas are frequently solicited from
salesperson perspective. It seeks to understand a neglected area of salespeople who are granted a high level of autonomy in their jobs. In
research in both personal selling and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial addition, information sharing is encouraged and supported both verti-
self-efficacy positively and significantly influences both creative selling cally and horizontally throughout the organization.
and sales innovativeness. Furthermore, these entrepreneurial sales ac- Accordingly, top management should consider providing appro-
tions directly and positively affect individual B2B sales performance. priate training and skills in continuously fostering innovative and cre-
This is a novel contribution to the marketing and sales literature and ative sales actions. This suggestion is in line with the view that senior
entrepreneurship literature. executives should have relevant entrepreneurial skills; otherwise, em-
This study also adds to the literature by looking at ESE and sales ployees’ entrepreneurial sales actions may be curtailed (Chakravarthy &
performance differently. Previous studies in this area have focused on Lorange, 2008). At the same time, the organization’s business model or
the organization and senior management. However, this research ex- strategic planning should reflect entrepreneurial sales actions if senior
amines these constructs at the “middle level” of the organization, spe- management is serious about achieving improved individual B2B sales
cifically, at the individual B2B salesperson working in a wide range of performance (Bolton & Lane, 2012; Gielnik et al., 2017).
firms and industries. This study explores individual entrepreneurial sales actions among
From the study results, most B2B salespeople pursued a high level of middle-level employees (B2B salespeople) working in large firms and
creative selling (R2 = 0.51) and sales innovativeness (R2 = 0.38), which the relevance these activities have for their actions and sales perfor-
positively and significantly affected individual sales performance. mance (Evans et al., 2012). Edwards (2014, p. 31) reports a quote from a
Therefore, if top management wants their salespeople to improve their top-level executive that entrepreneurial employees “treat their job as if it
B2B sales performance, but at the same time, require salespeople to was their own small business” and treat the organization “as if it was
behave within their “corporate guidelines” (i.e., take no or minimal their own.” When supported by top management, these individual
risks), this may inhibit the B2B salespeople’s full entrepreneurial po- entrepreneurial sales actions will enhance the overall performance for
tential and performance. This study’s findings can help justify the con- both the salesperson and the firm.
sequences of this expectation. Finally, as far as entrepreneurial sales actions are concerned,
Finally, as stated earlier, even with extensive research, sales per- particularly sales innovativeness, senior management should recognize
formance is a complex construct to explain or predict (Churchill et al., that these are not incremental innovation initiatives that involve mainly
1985; Evans et al., 2012; Verbeke et al., 2011). This study found that ESE process improvement (Christensen, 2013). While incremental in-
and its relationship to creative selling and sales innovativeness novations aim to gain short-term improvements and performance, they
accounted for 51% and 38%, respectively, of the variation of the total cannot withstand any significant market disruptions incurred through
effect. Notably, the relationship of creative selling and sales innova- increased competition, technology changes, and liberalizing trade pol-
tiveness to sales performance accounted for 30%. Thus, the total effect icies (Christensen & Raynor, 2013). Given the significance of sales
variation is significantly higher than reported in previous studies. Thus, performance to a firm’s future prosperity, organizations need to focus
B2B salespeople with high ESE levels using more entrepreneurial selling more on creating and developing sales innovativeness and building the
actions such as creative selling and sales innovativeness will enhance capability and capacity for salespeople for innovation (Ferdinand &
their sales performance. Wahyuningsih, 2018; Kahn, 2018).

5.3. Managerial implications 5.4. Limitations

The study will help senior management understand that salespeople This study’s primary limitation that constrains generalizability is
who possess a higher level of ESE and use entrepreneurial sales actions that the sampling frame is a non-random judgment sample. In addition,
will improve their B2B sales performance. It may also have implications the findings were drawn from B2B salespeople working in prominent
for the overall strategic direction chosen by the organization. If, for Australian-based organizations.

590
J. Edwards et al. Journal of Business Research 142 (2022) 585–593

Secondly, due to the time limitation, a cross-sectional study was Declaration of Competing Interest
adopted. This approach limited the analysis to examine the effects of the
ESE, entrepreneurial sales actions, and the individual B2B sales perfor- The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
mance relationship. For example, the research may not have realized the interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
full results of this relationship as the entrepreneurial sales actions may the work reported in this paper.
have been relatively new. However, the findings begin to articulate the
relationship between a salesperson’s ESE, their entrepreneurial sales References
actions used in B2B selling, and their individual sales performance.
Thirdly, several variables were introduced into the PLS-SEM analysis Agnihotri, R., Rapp, A. A., Andzulis, J. M., & Gabler, C. B. (2014). Examining the drivers
and performance implications of boundary spanner creativity. Journal of Service
to gauge the potential effects of the ESE – entrepreneurial sales actions –
Research, 17(2), 164–181.
sales performance relationship. However, this study did not use control Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work
variables such as age, gender, size, industry, tenure in the job to assess environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154–1184.
the potential effects of these variables on the overall relationship. Amyx, D., Bhuian, S. N., & Shows, G. D. (2016). Customer-salespeople relationship.
Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 34(5), 586–604.
Finally, although the study recognizes the positive and significant Bag, S., Gupta, S., Kumar, A., & Sivarajah, U. (2021). An integrated artificial intelligence
effect of ESE on entrepreneurial sales actions and individual sales per- framework for knowledge creation and B2B marketing rational decision making for
formance, it did not assess the effectiveness of the various innovation improving firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 92(2021), 178–189.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman.
and creative actions implemented by B2B salespeople during the period Baron, R. A. (2004). The cognitive perspective: A valuable tool for answering
of this study. entrepreneurship’s basic “why” questions. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(2),
221–239.
Bodla, M. A., & Naeem, B. (2014). Creativity as a mediator for intrinsic motivation and
sales performance. Creativity Research Journal, 26(4), 468–473.
5.5. Future research suggestions Bolander, W., Satornino, C. B., Hughes, D. E., & Ferris, G. R. (2015). Social networks
within sales organizations: Their development and importance for salesperson
New empirical evidence was established from the study’s findings performance. Journal of Marketing, 79(6), 1–16.
Bolton, D. L., & Lane, M. D. (2012). Individual entrepreneurial orientation: Development
that entrepreneurial self-efficacy positively and significantly influences of a measurement instrument. Education+. Training, 54(2–3), 219–233.
entrepreneurial sales actions and individual sales performance. There Chakravarthy, B., & Lorange, P. (2008). Driving renewal: The entrepreneur-manager. The
are several potential areas for future research. Journal of Business Strategy, 29(2), 14–21.
Chen, C., Greene, P., & Crick, A. (1998). Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish
First, due to the distinct sample type, the generalizability of the entrepreneurs from managers? Journal of Business Venturing, 13(4), 295–316.
findings could not be fully established. Future research should Christensen, C. M. (2013). The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great
encourage more organizations and other job roles/functions to develop Firms to Fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Christensen, C., & Raynor, M. (2013). The Innovator’s Solution: Creating and Sustaining
more robust empirical evidence of entrepreneurial strategy-making –
Successful Growth. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
sales performance practices in firms in Australia. This is important as the Churchill, G., Ford, N., Hartley, S., & Walker, O. (1985). The determinants of salesperson
research suggests that entrepreneurial self-efficacy is positively related performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 22(2), 103–118.
Coelho, F., Augusto, M., & Lages, L. (2011). Contextual factors and the creativity of
to entrepreneurial sales actions and individual sales performance from
frontline employees: The mediating effects of role stress and intrinsic motivation.
an individual B2B salesperson’s viewpoint. Journal of Retailing, 87(1), 31–45.
Second, the outcomes of this study are based on a cross-sectional Colter, T., Guan, M., Mahdavian, M., Razzaq, S., & Schneider, J. D. (2018). What the
study. However, we do not know if the entrepreneurial sales actions future science of B2B sales growth looks like. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/
(i.e., creative selling and sales innovativeness) were relatively new or what-the-future-science-of-b2b-sales-growth-looks-like. Accessed March 13, 2021.
established to B2B salespeople. As a result, this research has not fully Covin, J. G., & Miles, M. P. (1999). Corporate entrepreneurship and the pursuit of
benefited from the actual impact and effectiveness of entrepreneurial competitive advantage. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(3), 47–63.
Covin, J. G., & Miles, M. P. (2007). Strategic use of corporate venturing. Entrepreneurship
sales actions on individual sales performance. Future research may Theory and Practice, 31(2), 183–207.
benefit by using a longitudinal research design that extends the data Dalecki, L. (2019). Entrepreneurial selling in context. Journal of Research in Marketing and
collection period for studying the full effect of entrepreneurial sales Entrepreneurship, 21(2), 103–125.
De Jong, J., Parker, S. K., Wennekers, S., & Wu, C. (2011). Corporate entrepreneurship at
actions. the individual level: measurement and determinants. EIM Research Reports Ref. No:
Third, other factors influence B2B sales. There may be a high vari- H201108, Zoetermeer.
ation in the factors of the procurement area, including cost, risk, and Dess, G. G., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2005). The role of entrepreneurial orientation in
stimulating effective corporate entrepreneurship. Academy of Management
purchase frequency. Future research may better integrate the procure-
Perspectives, 19(1), 147–156.
ment characteristics of purchase costs, frequency, and risks, including Edwards, J. C. P. (2014). A Qualitative Exploration of the Determinants of Salespersons’
the critical issues of performance risks and corporate social re- Performance in Financial Services Organizations. Sydney, Australia: Macquarie
University. Unpublished Thesis.
sponsibility (CSR) alignment issues.
Evans, K. R., Landry, T. D., Li, P. C., & Zou, S. (2007). How sales controls affect job-
Furthermore, the continuous liberalization of government trade related outcomes: The role of organizational sales-related psychological
policies and the need to pursue entrepreneurial sales actions to improve preparedness perceptions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(3),
B2B sales performance are critical entrepreneurial imperatives for or- 445–459.
Evans, K., McFarland, R., Dietz, B., & Jaramillo, F. (2012). Advancing sales performance
ganizations operating in the 21st century (Colter et al., 2018). This research: A focus on five under-researched topic areas. Journal of Personal Selling &
imperative for entrepreneurship theories and practices to “work Sales Management, 32(1), 89–105.
together” with sales was established in this study. The contributions of Ferdinand, A. T., & Wahyuningsih, W. (2018). Salespeople’s innovativeness: A driver of
sales performance. Management & Marketing: Challenges for the Knowledge Society, 13
adopting an entrepreneurial self-efficacy approach and encouraging (2), 966–984.
entrepreneurial sales actions had a positive and significant effect on Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with
individual B2B sales performance. unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1),
39–50.
Franke, G. R., & Park, J. E. (2006). Salesperson adaptive selling behavior and customer
CRediT authorship contribution statement orientation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 693–702.
Frese, M. (2009). Towards a psychology of entrepreneurship – An action theory
perspective. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 5(6), 437–496.
Mr John Edwards: Conceptualization, Writing - original draft, Gielnik, M., Uy, M., Funken, R., & Bischoff, K. M. (2017). Boosting and sustaining
Writing - review and editing, Formal Analysis. Professor Morgan P. passion: A long-term perspective on the effects of entrepreneurship training. Journal
Miles: Conceptualization, Writing - review and editing, Supervision. of Business Venturing, 32(3), 334–353.
Groza, M. D., Locander, D. A., & Howlett, C. H. (2016). Linking thinking styles to sales
Professor Steve D’Alessandro: Methodology, Supervision. Dr. Mark performance: The importance of creativity and subjective knowledge. Journal of
Frost: Supervision. Business Research, 69(10), 4185–4193.

591
J. Edwards et al. Journal of Business Research 142 (2022) 585–593

Gupta, S., Hanssens, D., Hardie, B., Kahn, W., Kumar, V., Lin, N., & Sriram, S. (2006). Plouffe, C. R., Bolander, W., & Cote, J. A. (2014). Which influence tactics lead to sales
Modeling customer lifetime value. Journal of Service Research, 9(2), 139–155. performance? It is a matter of style. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management,
Hadjikhani, A., & LaPlaca, P. (2013). Development of B2B marketing theory. Industrial 34(2), 141–159.
Marketing Management, 42(3), 294–305. Plouffe, C. R., Bolander, W., Cote, J. A., & Hochstein, B. (2016). Does the customer
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to matter most? Exploring strategic frontline employees’ influence of customers, the
report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. organizational business team, and external business partners. Journal of Marketing,
Han, J. K., Kim, N., & Srivastava, R. K. (1998). Market orientation and organizational 80(1), 106–123.
performance: Is innovation a missing link? Journal of Marketing, 62(4), 30–45. Rapp, A., & Beeler, L. (2021). The state of selling & sales management research: A review
Hartmann, N. N., Wieland, H., Vargo, S., Hartmann, N. N., Wieland, H., & Vargo, S. L. and future research agenda. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 29(1), 37–50.
(2018). Converging on a new theoretical foundation for selling. Journal of Marketing, Read, S., Dew, N., Sarasvathy, S. D., Song, M., & Wiltbank, R. (2009). Marketing under
82(2), 1–18. uncertainty: The logic of an effectual approach. Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 1–18.
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new Robinson, L., Marshall, G. W., & Stamps, M. B. (2005). Sales force use of technology:
technology research: Updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116 Antecedents to technology acceptance. Journal of Business Research, 58(12),
(1), 2–20. 1623–1631.
Hills, G. E. (1987). Marketing and entrepreneurship research issues: Scholarly justification Runco, M. A. (2014). Creativity: Theories and Themes: Research, Development, and Practice
(pp. 3–15). USASBE, Marietta, GA: Research at the Marketing/Entrepreneurship (2nd Edition.). Elsevier Academic Press.
Interface. Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Educating for Innovation. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1),
Hisrich, R., Langan-Fox, J., & Grant, S. (2007). Entrepreneurship research and practice: A 41–48.
call to action for psychology. American Psychologist, 62(6), 575–589. Schindehutte, M., & Morris, M. H. (2009). Advancing Strategic Entrepreneurship
Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., & Zahra, S. A. (2002). Middle managers’ perception of the Research: The role of complexity science in shifting the paradigm. Entrepreneurship,
organizational environment for corporate entrepreneurship: Assessing a Theory, and Practice, 33(1), 241–276.
measurement scale. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(3), 253–273. Sengupta, S., Krapfel, R., & Pusateri, M. A. (2000). An Empirical Investigation of Key
Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., Shepherd, D. A., & Bott, J. P. (2009). Managers’ corporate Account Salesperson Effectiveness. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 20
entrepreneurial actions: Examining perception and position. Journal of Business (4), 253–261.
Venturing, 24(3), 236–247. Silver, L. S., Dwyer, S., & Alford, B. (2006). Learning and performance goal orientation of
Jones, E., Roberts, J., & Chonko, L. (2000). Motivating sales entrepreneurs to change: A salespeople revisited: The role of performance-approach and performance-avoidance
conceptual framework of factors leading to successful change management orientations. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 26(1), 27–38.
initiatives in sales organizations. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 8(2), Spillecke, S. B., & Brettel, M. (2013). The impact of sales management controls on the
37–49. entrepreneurial orientation of the sales department. European Management Journal,
Jones, E., Chonko, L., Rangarajan, D., & Roberts, J. (2007). The role of overload on job 31(4), 410–422.
attitudes, turnover intentions, and salesperson performance. Journal of Business Sproul, C., Cox, K., & Ross, A. (2019). Entrepreneurial actions: Implications for firm
Research, 60(7), 663–671. performance. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26(5), 706–725.
Kahn, K. B. (2018). Understanding Innovation. Business Horizons, 61(3), 453–460. Steward, M. D., Walker, B. A., Hutt, M. D., & Kumar, A. (2010). The coordination
Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment strategies of high performing salespeople: Internal working relationships that drive
approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJEC), 11(4), 1–10. success. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(5), 550–556.
Kock, N. (2019). Factor-based structural equation modeling with WarpPLS. Australasian Sujan, H., Weitz, B. A., & Kumar, N. (1994). Learning orientation, working smart, and
Marketing Journal, 27(1), 57–63. effective selling. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 39–52.
Kuratko, D. F. (2017). Corporate Entrepreneurship 2.0: Research Development and Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling.
Future Directions. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 13(6), 441–490. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159–205.
Lemon, K. N., Rust, R. T., & Zeithaml, V. A. (2001). What drives customer equity? Ulaga, W., & Kohli, A. K. (2018). The role of a solutions salesperson: Reducing
Marketing Management, 10(1), 20–25. uncertainty and fostering adaptiveness. Industrial Marketing Management, 69
Locander, D. A., Weinberg, F. J., & Locander, W. B. (2018). The mediating role of sales (February 2018), 161–168.
department innovation orientation on creative selling. Journal of Managerial Issues, Verbeke, W., Dietz, B., & Verwaal, E. (2011). Drivers of sales performance: A
30(4), 463–1403. contemporary meta-analysis. Have salespeople become knowledge brokers? Journal
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. (1996). Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(3), 407–428.
and Linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172. Wales, W. J., Kraus, S., Filser, M., Stöckmann, C., & Covin, J. G. (2020). The status quo of
Martins, E. C., & Terblanche, F. (2003). Building organizational culture that stimulates research on entrepreneurial orientation: Conversational landmarks and theoretical
creativity and innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 6(1), 64–74. scaffolding. Journal of Business Research, 128(C), 564–577.
Matsuo, M. (2009). The influence of sales management control on innovativeness of sales Wang, G., & Miao, C. F. (2015). Effects of sales force market orientation on creativity,
departments. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 29(4), 321–331. innovation implementation, and sales performance. Journal of Business Research, 68
Matthews, R. S., Chalmers, D. M., & Fraser, S. S. (2018). The intersection of (11), 2374–2382.
entrepreneurship and selling: An interdisciplinary review, framework, and future Wang, G., & Netemeyer, R. (2004). Salesperson Creative Performance:
research agenda. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(6), 691–719. Conceptualisation, Measurement, and Nomological Validity. Journal of Business
McFarland, R. G. (2019). A conceptual framework of macrolevel and microlevel adaptive Research, 57(8), 805–812.
selling theory, setting a research agenda, and suggested measurement strategies. Wang, H., Schrock, W. A., Kumar, A., & Hughes, D. E. (2020). Effectual selling in service
Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 39(3), 207–221. ecosystems. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 40(4), 251–266.
McGee, J., & Peterson, M. (2019). The long-term impact of entrepreneurial self-efficacy Weeks, W. A., & Kahle, L. R. (1990a). Social values and salespeople’s effort:
and entrepreneurial orientation on venture performance. Journal of Small Business Entrepreneurial versus routine selling. Journal of Business Research, 20(2), 183–190.
Management, 57(3), 720–737. Weeks, W. A., & Kahle, L. R. (1990b). Salespeople’s Time Use and Performance. Journal
Miao, C. F., & Wang, G. (2016). The differential effects of functional vis-à-vis relational of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 10(1), 29–37.
customer orientation on salesperson creativity. Journal of Business Research, 69(12), Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & Van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling
6021–6030. for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and Empirical Illustration.
Miao, C., Qian, S., & Ma, D. (2017). The relationship between entrepreneurial self- MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 177–195.
efficacy and firm performance: A meta-analysis of main and moderator effects. Zallocco, R., Pullins, E., & Mallin, M. L. (2009). A re-examination of B2B Sales
Journal of Small Business Management, 55(1), 87–107. Performance. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 24(8), 598–610.
Miles, M. P., & Arnold, D. (1991). The relationship between marketing orientation and Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Hills, G. E. (2005). The mediating role of self-efficacy in the
entrepreneurial orientation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 15(4), 49–65. development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6),
Morris, M., Avila, R., & Teeple, E. (1990). Sales management as an entrepreneurial 1265–1272.
activity. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 10(2), 1–15.
Morris, M. H., Schindehutte, M., & Allen, J. (2005). The Entrepreneur’s Business Model:
John Edwards is a PhD Candidate at Charles Sturt University. His research topic is:
Toward a unified perspective. Journal of Business Research, 58(6), 726–735.
“Linking Sales Performance to Entrepreneurial Strategy-Making, Corporate Entrepre-
Murray, J. A. (1981). Marketing is home for the entrepreneurial process. Industrial
neurship Preparedness and Entrepreneurial Sales Actions”. He completed his Masters of
Marketing Management, 10(2), 93–99.
Research at Macquarie University in 2015. His previous work experience included the
Newman, A., Obschonka, M., Schwarz, S., Cohen, M., & Nielsen, I. (2019).
Director of Corporate & Executive Education at Macquarie Graduate School of Manage-
Entrepreneurial self-efficacy: A systematic review of the literature on its theoretical
ment; and held senior marketing and sales roles at Westpac, Citibank, Advance Bank,
foundations, measurement, antecedents, and outcomes, and an agenda for future
Diageo, and Kellogg’s.
research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 110(2019), 403–419.
Peterson, R. A. (2019). Self-efficacy and personal selling: Review and examination with
an emphasis on sales performance. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 40 Professor Morgan P. Miles is an Honorary Professor of the School of Agriculture and Food
(1), 57–71. Sciences at the University of Queensland. Professor Morgan P. Miles is also an Adjunct
Plouffe, C. (2018). Is it navigation, networking, coordination… or what? A Professor and was previously Professor of Entrepreneurship at Charles Stuart University.
multidisciplinary review of influences on the intra-organizational dimension of the Prior to that, he was Professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation at the University of
sales role and performance. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 38(2), Canterbury. Previously he had been the Tom Hendrix Chair of Excellence at the University
241–264. of Tennessee- Martin, Professor of Enterprise Development at the University of Tasmania,
and Professor of Marketing at Georgia Southern University. He has been a visiting scholar
at Georgia Tech, Cambridge University, University of Stockholm, the University of Otago,

592
J. Edwards et al. Journal of Business Research 142 (2022) 585–593

University of Auckland, and an Erskine Fellow at the University of Canterbury. He holds a awarded the ANZMAC Distinguished Marketing Educator of the Year Award, in recogni-
D.B.A. in Marketing from Mississippi State University, an M.S. and B.S. in Agricultural tion of his sustained excellence and innovation in marketing education. In 2017, he was
Economics from Virginia Tech and Mississippi State University respectively. Currently, he part of the successful bid team and co-investigator for the Cyber Security CRC which was
is working with the Department of Industry on entrepreneurial support program policies awarded $140 million by industry and government.
dealing specifically with accelerator and incubators. Prior to becoming an academic
Professor Miles worked with the U.S. Small Business Administration’s Small Business
Dr Mark Frost is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Management and Marketing at Charles
Development Centre programs in South Carolina, Mississippi and the U.S. Virgin Islands as
Sturt University (CSU). Mark is actively engaged with CSU study partners in Sydney,
a director and management consultant.
Melbourne, China, and Cambodia and has also taught into the Cambodia partner program.
Prior to joining CSU Mark had a sixteen year banking career with a major Australian bank.
Professor Steven D’Alessandro is a Professor of Marketing at the University of Tasmania. Over this time, he worked in their International Trade, Financial Markets, Corporate
He has published 114 refereed papers in leading international journals, books, and con- Banking, and Regional Agribusiness Banking areas. His experience in corporate banking
ferences. Prior to academia, Steve as a market research consultant for blue-chip companies saw him work with some of the largest agribusinesses in Australia, in the wheat, cotton,
such as Pacific-Dunlop, ANZ, Challenge Bank, BHP, Telstra, and Ford. He has published chicken, dairy and beef industries. His experience in financial markets involved foreign
several market-leading textbooks on Market Research and Consumer Behaviour as well as exchange, commodity futures and interest rate products and derivatives.
an original text on Services Marketing with Oxford University Press. In 2012 he was

593