業務人員幫助行為量表之建立與評量

(1)

國立交通大學

管理科學系

碩士論文

業務人員幫助行為量表之修正與評量

A Refined Measure of the Salespeople

Helping Behavior

研究生：江奕萱

指導教授：張家齊博士

(2)

業務人員幫助行為量表之修正與評量

A Refined Measure of the Salespeople Helping Behavior

研究生：江奕萱 Student：Yi-Hsuan Chiang

指導教授：張家齊博士 Advisor：Dr. Chia-Chi Chang

國立交通大學

管理科學系

碩士論文

A Thesis

Submitted to Department of Management Science

College of Management

National Chiao Tung University

In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements

For the Degree of

Master in Business Administration

August 2009

Hsin-Chu, Taiwan, Republic of China

(3)

i

業務人員幫助行為量表之修正與評量

研究生：江奕萱指導教授：張家齊博士

國立交通大學管理科學系碩士班

中文摘要

「業務人員幫助行為」係指業務員提供職責以外的幫助行為給顧客，近年來的研究指出，業務人員幫助行為似乎對銷售績效有正向影響，但既有文獻中仍缺乏衡量業務人員幫助行為的衡量方式，以進行相關實證。本研究試圖發展出一個「業務人員幫助行為」量表，用以測量業務人員提供顧客的幫助行為程度。本研究分成兩個階段，其受測者為壽險業的業務人員，分別有190位及335位參與。研究結果顯示，本「業務人員幫助行為」量表共包含二十九個項目，以及五個層面：實質上的幫助、社交聯誼、送禮、情感支持和資訊分享。此量表有助於研究者測量業務人員幫助行為，也能幫助管理者知道如何增進銷售績效。關鍵字：業務人員的幫助行為、量表建立、職責外協助、量化研究

(4)

ii

A Refined Measure of the Salespeople Helping Behavior

Student：Yi-Hsuan Chiang Advisors：Dr. Chia-Chi Chang

Department of Management Science

National Chiao Tung University

Abstract

Salespeople helping behavior (SHB) is one of the extra-role behaviors that salespeople provide directed at their customer. In recent years, some previous researches have pointed out helpful behaviors directed at customers may be positively associated with sales performance, but few tools can measure SHB. This study developed a SHB scale for salesperson to assess the degree of salespeople helping behavior to customers. The study is divided into two stages: all respondents are salespeople from life insurance industry, with 190 and 335 respondents involve each of the stages. The result shows that an SHB scale with in 29 items of five dimensions: practical assistance, social interaction, gift giving, emotional support, and

information sharing, could be reasonably constructed. This scale provides a useful instrument for researchers who hope to measure SHB and for portal managers who want to improve their sales performance.

Key words: salespeople helping behaviors, scale development, extra-role assistances, quantitative research

(5)

iii

致謝辭

真的是千呼萬喚始出來，才有現在這本論文。要感謝的人實在是太多了，有太多人與我一同參與在研究的過程中。首先，一定要先來感謝我親愛的指導教授張家齊老師啊!老師每個禮拜都要撥出一整天的時間與我咪聽，馬不停蹄的跟我討論量表的構面或是問項，就怕我來不及趕在 8 月底前畢業。這樣的辛苦誰人知啊!(泣~~) 當然，除了老師的幫忙以外，還有許多貴人的扶持，才能讓這個稍微像樣一點的論文誕生。感謝我親愛的室友－維怡的陪伴，總是熱心的提醒我許多論文該注意的事，也總是在我擔心論文無法順利完成的時候，給予我支持、安慰。更感謝佳誼學長跟淑慧學姊在我研究有問題的時候為我解惑，還要花時間在 skype 上與我討論研究，真的是謝謝你們的指教與耐心。而那些與我同一研究室的戰友們：惠敏、淑涵、依璇、小賴以及信堯學弟，你們也辛苦了，與你們一同嘻笑是碩二時期裡最歡樂的時光。尤其是惠敏與淑涵，總在每個星期三咪聽結束的時候，陪我在摩斯大吐一個禮拜以來的不快，願畢業後這個「三人會議」還可以再找機會進行。接下來，我要感謝那些幫助我發問卷的人，特別是秀英阿姨、簡媽、愛華學姊、婉茜姐姐、書政、鈺凱、俊麟、國慶、淑涵、維怡、立峰。沒有你們幫忙發問卷或是介紹業務員給我認識，我的問卷真不知要何年何月何日才收的完呢! (若我漏述誰的名字請見諒，因為貴人實在太多，但小女子是很誠心的感謝你們) 最後，我要感謝對我不離不棄的家人，不管在外面遇到什麼事，家人永遠為我提供一個最好的避風港，讓我可以毫無掛慮的專心寫論文。而我的另一群家人－11 們，雖然你們有些人在國外，但我知道你們給予我的愛從來都沒有少過。就算我因為論文生不出來的時候對你們任性、發脾氣，你們仍然接納。無論是我的優點或是缺點，你們真的都愛我，我感受到了! 論文、榮耀、權柄都是屬於祢的阿門!!

(6)

iv

List of Tables

Table 3- 1: Frequency Table – First Survey ... 19

Table 3- 2: Frequency Table – Second Survey ... 20

Table 4- 1: KMO and Bartlett‘s Test ... 25

Table 4- 2: Total Variance Explained ... 25

Table 4- 3: Exploratory Factor Analysis ... 26

Table 4- 4: Data Result of Confirmatory Factor Analysis ... 32

Table 4- 5: Indices of CFA ... 34

(9)

vii

List of Figures

Figure 1- 1: Research Flow ... 3

Figure 3- 1: Process for Developing the SHB Scale... 14

Figure 3- 2: Process in Item Development ... 17

Figure 4- 1: Process in Selecting Items... 23

Figure 4- 2: Process for Exploratory Factor Analysis... 29

Figure 4- 3: Process for Confirmatory Factor Analysis ... 29

(10)

1

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Research Motivation and Background

More and more salespeople engage in extra-role behavior because people believe that the additional effort involved in extra-role or prosocial behaviors may indirectly or directly improve their work performance, thus increasing their rewards (Vroom and Deci 1974). Extra-role behaviors are the behavior that cannot be prescribed or required in advance for a given job (Katz & Kahn 1966), e.g., helping coworkers with a job related problem; accepting orders without fuss; tolerating temporary impositions without complaint; and protecting and conserving organizational resources etc. (Bateman & Organ, 1983). Bettencourt and Brown (1997) claimed that extra-role behaviors are positively related to customer satisfaction. In addition, O‘Reilly and Chatman (1986) suggested that there are two classes of dependent variables related to performance: (a) extra-role or prosocial behavior- are discretionary and not role prescribed (Brief & Motowidlo 1986; King & John 2005), and (b) in-role or

job-prescribed behavior. Puffer (1987) also found prosocial behavior is associated with work performance.

Salespeople’s extra-role behaviors are similar to prosocial organization behavior, organizational citizenship behavior and social support. Many researches considered that these

(11)

2

behaviors can promote salesperson performance directly or indirectly, but few studies

indicated that the salespeople helping behavior (SHB) impact on performance. And few tools can measure SHB.

However, salespeople helping behavior (SHB) is one of the extra-role behaviors that salespeople provide directed at their customer by Chang‘s (2005) definition. This study tries to develop a scale to measure SHB.

1.2 Research Objectives

This study is an extended study of Chang‘s (2009). Our objective is to develop a scale to measuring SHB and then compare with other behaviors which are related with SHB.

1.3 Research Structure

Based on Chang‘s study (2009), this research is structured in five chapters illustrated in Figure 1-1. Chapter 1 introduces background and motivation of this research. Chapter 2 shows the relationship between associated behaviors and SHB with reviewing literatures. Chapter 3 is the research methodology of developing an SHB scale. Furthermore, we tested its validity and reliability. Chapter 4 presents the results. Then, the results and implications will be discussed in Chapter 5.

(12)

3

Figure 1- 1: Research Flow Research background and motivation

Literature review

Research methodology

Sample collection and analysis

Discussion Forming the SHB scale

(13)

4

Chapter 2 Literature Review

Previous studies have identified various behaviors that might be connected to the concept of SHB which means a salesperson provides extra-role helps to customers, such as Helping Behavior, Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB), Prosocial Organization Behavior (POB), and Social Support. We explore why people engage in such behavior and how does it benefit organization or customers, and what factors influence SHB. Discuss these questions for next:

2.1 Helping Behavior versus SHB

In Gottlieb (1978) study, there are twenty-six helping behaviors organized into four dimensions of influence based on theoretical considerations: (a) Emotionally sustaining behaviors－the helper promotes emotionally supportive conditions for the helpee, (b) Problem solving behaviors－the helper provides helpee information or the helper personally intervenes in the problem situation, (c) Indirect personal influence－the helper provides available latent influence when the helpee needs it, (d) Environmental action－the helper intervenes in the environment to reduce source of stress.

(14)

5

identified in the marketing settings. Marketing helping behaviors act in the marketplace and benefit others in purchasing and consumption based on Price and her colleagues‘ (1995) definition. Market helpers can offset a lack of market information, police the market, protect vulnerable consumers, and contribute to the general welfare of consumers (Moorman and Price 1989; Higie, Feick, and Price 1987). Prior research found that marketing helping behaviors have four important features:

First, reliance on informal market assistance is pervasive. Research continually

demonstrates that information and recommendations from other market buyers have a strong impact on consumer preferences and choices (Arndt 1967; King and Summers 1967). Price and Feick (1984) also suggested that people would be likely to get information and advice from unknown person.

Second, market helpers provide variously different kinds of market assistance, including structuring the decision problem, validating the consumer‘s decision process, evaluating product alternatives, and making the final product choice (Hartman and Kiecker 1991; Price and Feick 1984).

Third, evidence of the range of market helping behavior is largely anecdotal. For example, (1) ―purchased or picked up something in town for a friend or family member who was not able to pick it up him/herself‖ (Amato 1985, p. 239) and (2) ―picked up things at

(15)

6

Fourth, there is few evidence shows why people provide market assistance. Some studies explore motivations for only one type of market assistance—sharing information (Bloch 1986; Curren and Folkes 1987; Dichter 1966; Richins 1983).

Market mavens have been defined as ―who have information about many kinds of

products, places to shop, and other facets of markets, and who initiate discussions with

consumers and respond to requests from consumers for market information,‖ (Feick and Price

1987, p. 85). Research demonstrates that consumers rely on market mavens for information and that mavens provide market information across a range of topics (Feick and Price 1987; Higie, Price, and Feick 1987; Slama and Williams 1990). Thus, preliminary evidence suggests that ―Market mavens‖ act as market helpers.

As mentioned above, marketing helping behaviors are analogous to SHB which is performed toward customers by salespeople.

2.2 Prosocial Organization Behavior (POB) versus SHB

Worthy (1986) suggested that prosocail behavior represented extra-effort and

conscientiousness at work. People believe that the additional effort involved in extra-role or prosocial behaviors may indirectly or directly improve their work performance, which may also increase their rewards (Vroom and Deci 1974). Also, Bettencourt & Brown (1997) declared that prosocial organization behavior (POB) is the helpful behaviors of employees

(16)

7

point toward the organization or other individuals. Three types of POB are assumed to be beneficial to the firm: (a) Extra-role customer service—employees go ―out of the way‖ or ―beyond the call‖ for customers, (b) Role-prescribed customer service—expected employee behaviors in serving the firm‘s customers, and (c) Cooperation—employees give helpful behaviors to other members of their workgroup (Organ 1988a; Puffer 1987; Bettencourt & Brown 1997).

Base on previous researches, POB can entail increasing job performance and brings some functional consequences, such as improving organizational efficiency, increasing job satisfaction and so on. But, what factors result in POB? Studies have generally discovered a positive relationship between job satisfaction and extra-role prosocial behavior (Bateman & Organ 1983; Farh, Podsakoff, & Organ 1990; Motowidlo 1984; Scholl, Cooper, & Mckenna 1987; Smith, Organ, & Near 1983; Puffer 1987). However, Cohen & Cohen (1983) suggested that the relationship between these two is spurious because Bettencourt and Brown (1997) demonstrated that ―workplace fairness perceptions are positively related to contact employee extra-role customer service and job satisfaction,” (p. 50).

There are two distinct conceptual bases which declare such behavior would be

influenced by job satisfaction: (1) social exchange theory—Blau (1964) predicted that people seek to reciprocate those who benefit them. Employees, who aware that the organization pays attention to their benefits, will not only have greater job satisfaction, but also act to return the

(17)

8

favor by executing more prosocial behaviors; (2) individuals are more likely to go acting prosocial behavior when they are in positive mood (Berkowitz 1972). Thus, someone at least partially seize positive mood with job satisfaction, it will be more likely to exhibit prosocial acts (Puffer 1987; Smith, Organ & Near 1983).

In addition, Mcneely and Megline (1994) contended that two dispositional variables: the value of concern for others and empathy, and two situational variables: reward equity and recognition for desirable behavior, can positively influence POB. Further, Baruch, Sandler and Ramsay (2004) study revealed that both need for achievement and organizational commitment can bring prosocial behavior obviously.

As mentioned above, POB can be considered in-role or extra-role behavior and its objectives are the organization and its customers, whereas SHB is extra-role behavior and toward customers only.

2.3 Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) versus SHB

OCB is similar to POB, and they take aim at colleagues and organization.

Organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) were defined as a salespeople‘s discretionary and extra-role behavior that sales managers take OCB into account when evaluating a salesperson‘s overall performance (Organ 1988a, b; MacKenzie, Podsakoff and Fetter 1993) On the other hand, POB include not only extra-role behavior but also in-role behaviors. Organ

(18)

9

(1988a) also proposed that OCB may induce the function of organization to be more effective, without influencing a salesperson‘s true sales productivity necessarily. He identified five categories of OCB: (1) Altruism—the discretionary behavior of personnel help coworker with an organizationally relevant task (e.g., helping new salespeople adapt to the new conditions voluntarily), (2) Courtesy— preventing work-related problem with others (e.g., ―touching base with the manufacturing plant before making a large sale final‖), (3)

Sportsmanship—avoiding railing against slight matters, (4) Civic virtue—salesperson participates in, and is concerned about the life of company (e.g., recommending how

organization can be improved), (5) Conscientiousness—delivering on one‘s duty beyond the minimum role requirements of the organization. And ―helping behavior is a composite of several types of citizenship behavior—altruism, courtesy, peacemaking, and cheerleading‖

(Posdakoff & MacKenzie 1994, p.351). Though, both OCB and SHB are extra-role behaviors but the target of SHB is exclusively customers rather than coworker.

OCB is essential to an organization. People act OCBs such as helping associates to make deal so that they may increase customer satisfaction and also improve organization‘s long-term well-being (Netemeyer, Boles, McKee and McMurrian 1997). MacKenzie, Podsakoff and Fetter (1993) argued that OCB is more important than objective sales productivity when supervisors evaluate salespeople‘ performance. Yet, these behaviors can maintain and uplift both social and psychological context that supports task performance

(19)

10 (Organ 1997).

So, what managers can do to foster OCBs? Organ (1988a, b) cited several studies that job satisfaction can influence OCB, and Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman and Fetter (1990) found that the more employees trusted their managers, the more OCB they may exhibit. Consolidating job satisfaction and trust between salespeople and managers would be the key to increase OCB.

Table 2- 1: Similarity vs. Difference Behavior Categories Executor Target

POB Extra-role/

In-role Employee

Customer/ Coworker OCB Extra-role Employee Coworker SHB Extra-role Salesperson Customer

2.4 Social Support versus SHB

Social Support is another behavior similar to SHB. The term social support has been popularized to connote the various forms of aid and assistance supplied by family members, friends, neighbors, supervisor, management, coworkers, and others (Barrera, Sandler & Ramsay 1981; House and Wells 1978). Social support comprises different types or ―modes‖ of help or assistance (e.g., comfort, advice, a loan, companionship, or assistance with a task). Here, we collect several modes of social support:

The House and Wells model (1978) positions social support types as (1) Listening, (2) Showing concern, (3) Giving aid, (4) Giving tangible assistance, (5) Giving advice, and (6)

(20)

11

Giving suggestions. Mitchell and Trickett (1980) suggest that four modes of support capture the major distinctions: (a) Emotional support, (b) Task-oriented assistance, (c)

Communication of expectations, evaluations, and shared world view, and (d) Access to new and diverse information and social contacts. In Barrera‘s (1981) study, Barrera, Sandler and Ramsay suggest six social support modes: (a) Material aid (including financial), (b) Physical assistance, (c) Intimate interaction, (d) Guidance, (e) Feedback, and (f) Positive social

interaction. Vaux et al. (1987) developed a five modes of support scale: (a) Emotional support, (b) Socializing, (c) Practical assistance, (d) Financial assistance, and (e) Advice/guidance. In conclusion, we can see the dimensions of social support in each paper mentioned above are similar. No matter what kind aids or assistance be offered, they all are one kind of practical assistance. And the idea is mentioned in most of paper which indicated that

emotional support and socializing are both one of dimension of social support. The

dimensions of SHB are approximately similar to social support, but the scope of the former is more general than the latter.

2.5 A Possible Antecedents of SHB: Altruism

Cialdini et al. argued that adult altruism is a type of hedonism (Cialdini & Kenrick, 1976; Kenrick, Baumann, & Cialdini, 1979). Cialdini (1973) also emphasized that altruism and self-gratification have the equivalent function. Therefore, individuals often devote to

(21)

12

charity as to provide themselves with reward. And altruism is one of the antecedents of marketing behavior which we mentioned in 2.1 (Price 1995).

Some scholars pointed out empathy can cause altruism (Batson, O‘Quin, Fultz, Vanderplas, & Isen 1983; Baumann, Cialdini, & Kenrick 1981; Cialdini, Schaller, Houlihan, Arps and Fultz 1987). In Hoffman‘s (1981) study, he defined that empathy is considered as a vicarious affection to others. Empathy is not only functioning as a situational characteristic, but also depends on a person‘s general altruistic orientation (Boston 1991). Furthermore, empathy has been shown to have a significant effect on helping behavior (Boston, Baston, Griffitt, Barrientos, Brandt, Sprengelmeyer and Bayly 1989; Rosenhan, Salovey, & Hargis 1981).

Another antecedent of altruism is the norm of reciprocity (Gouldner 1960). Gouldner suggests that a norm of reciprocity, in its universal form, makes two interrelated, minimal demands: (1) people should help those who have helped them, and (2) people should not injure those who have helped them. For this reason, people are likely to return good deeds, when they are requested by the receiver or given voluntarily by the giver. The relationship between salespeople and customers could be solved based on this rule. Thus, salespeople may anticipate having a successful transaction or good relationship after offering good deeds for customers. Consequently, salespeople may tend to provide the extra-role assistance to customers.

(22)

13

Chapter 3 Research Methodology

This chapter demonstrates how research was designed and conducted, including item development, item selection, sampling and measurement. This study employed a qualitative inductive research approach that was suggested for several studies (Churchill 1979; Saxe & Weitz 1982; Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry 1988; Hinkin 1998; Tian and Bearden 2001; Parasuraman, Valarie and Arvind 2005;Yang and Cai 2005; Chi, Chen, Yang, Cheng and Tsai 2008).

3.1 Steps in Developing a Scale to Measure SHB

The procedure is used to develop a measure of SHB, illustrated in Figure 3-1, largely follows the guidelines recommended by Saxe & Weitz (1982), Tian and Bearden (2001), and Chi, Chen, Yang, Cheng and Tsai (2008).

(23)

14

Figure 3- 1: Process for Developing the SHB Scale

3.2 Dimension Development

With reference to the context of interviews used in earlier research (Cheng 2007), SHB can be divided into eight dimensions: (1) Assistances of insurance-unrelated specialties－

Development of SHB Dimensions Development of an Item Pool Assessment of Items and Dimensions by Experts First Survey of Salespeople to Select Best Items

Second Survey of Salespeople to

Assess Scale Properties

Five Dimensions from previous research

36 items was generated from previous research

(1) Five experts to allocate items to five dimensions

(2) Seven experts to judge item representative

Exploratory factor analysis to reassign items and restructure dimensions as necessary

Conducted confirmatory factor analysis and validity tests on the final SHB scale

(24)

15

salespeople help customers to solve specific and job-unrelated problems by their professional skills, (2) Insurance-related services－salespeople not just promote the goods, but also offer the service to ensure that customers buy the suitable insurance, (3) Gift giving－most of salespeople show consideration for customers by giving presents, (4) Social activities－the way to connect with customers, (5) Information sharing－share daily information or special topic information to customers, (6) Emotional support－provide comfort for customers when they meet problems, (7) Networking assistance－salespeople introduce suitable persons who they know to meet customers‘ need, and (8) Others－errands running or other trivial helping which not belong to all of the above. In addition, the SHB scale which was developed 18 items by Chang (2009) simplified into four dimensions: Assistance of specialty, Gift giving & Personal visit, Social activities, and Emotional support.

The insurance salespeople have to frequently contact with customers and they provide much diverse assistance to customers. Therefore, some general behaviors which are often taken by salespeople are not in Chang‘s (2009) study. Base on these previous literatures and our interview, we come up with five dimensions. They are (1) Practical assistance, (2) Social interaction, (3) Gift giving, (4) Emotional support and (5) Information sharing.

(25)

16 3.3 Item Development

The authors developed 36 items by modifying the initial 50 items which were generated as in the research of Chang (2009) and the selecting process followed Tian and Bearden (2001) and Chi, Chen, Yang, Cheng & Tsai (2008). We attempt to develop general items to embrace all of the ordinary salespeople helping behaviors.

First, five experts who have worked in the life insurance industry over seven years had to allocate each item to one of the five dimensions. After eliminating items that did not be classified into any appropriate category by over three experts, 36 items all remained.

Second, other seven experts who have worked in the life insurance industry over seven years were asked to evaluate each remaining items as clear representative, somewhat

representative, or no representative of the dimension.In Saxe & Weite (1982) study, they suggested that all retained items are rated ―clearly representative‖ by at least 50% of the judges (More than three experts evaluated as ―clearly representative‖). In this step, no item was deleted. These items were sent to an expedience sample of salespeople. And the

salespeople were asked to indicate the degree of their customers with whom they acted in the job-unrelated manner described in an item, using a seven-point Likert-type response scale anchored by ―very high‖ to ―very low.‖ Figure 3-2 illustrates the process in item development.

(26)

17

Figure 3- 2: Process in Item Development

3.4 Sample Selection

It was necessary to collect two sets of samples in the process of developing the scale. First survey of salespeople. The life insurance salespeople were chosen for his/her

highly interaction with customers, and they may have more SHB than others industry during the service delivery processes. An exploratory factor analysis was run to reassign items and restructure dimensions in this survey. The first sample consisted of 200 people in 18 firms, of whom 190 were usable (85 males and 105 females); 66.85% were less than 40 years of age; more than 57% of the respondents had an income of NT$500,000-2,000,000 p.a.; 25.79% had more than 10 years working experiences as an insurance salesperson; 31.05% had been in the present company for more than 6 years, and 60% of the salespeople had commission to annual income ratio of more than 50% (see Table 3-1).

1. Practical Assistance 2. Social Interaction 3. Gift Giving 4. Emotional Support 5. Information Sharing Generated form precious research A Pool of 36 Items 5 experts 36 Items 5 Dimensions 7 experts 36 Items Form Initial SHB Scale At least 6 experts rated items in appropriate category Clearly representative by 6 experts

(27)

18

Second survey of salespeople. In the second survey, a confirmatory factor analysis was

run to construct the finale SHB scale. The second sample consisted of 350 salespeople, and 335 of the respondents were usable (138 males and 197 females). 72.84 % were less than 40 years of age; over 53% of the respondents had an income of NT$500,000-2,000,000 p.a.; 21.79% had more than 10 years working experiences as an insurance salesperson; 27.46% had been in the present company for more than 6 years, and 56.41% of the salespeople had

(28)

19

Table 3- 1: Frequency Table – First Survey

Demographics Category Frequency Percent (%)

Sex Male Female 85 105 44.74 55.26 Age ≦ 30 31-40 41-50 ≧ 51 85 42 34 29 44.74 22.11 17.89 15.26 Education High School Bachelor Master and above

37 140 9 19.47 73.68 4.74 Overall Working Experiences ≦ 10 11-20 ≧ 21 108 56 26 56.84 29.47 13.68 Working Experiences in Insurance Industry ≦ 10 11-20 ≧ 21 141 43 6 74.21 22.63 3.16 Working Years in the Present Company ≦ 6 7-15 ≧ 16 131 37 22 68.95 19.47 11.58

Income Per Year

≦ 500,000 500,001-1,000,000 1,000,001-2,000,000 ≧ 2,000,001 68 77 32 13 35.79 40.51 16.84 6.84 Commission Rate (over salary) ≦ 50% 51-80% ≧ 81% 76 43 71 40.00 22.63 37.37

(29)

20

Table 3- 2: Frequency Table – Second Survey

Demographics Category Frequency Percent (%)

Sex Male Female 138 197 41.19 58.81 Age ≦ 30 31-40 41-50 ≧ 51 163 81 52 39 48.66 24.18 15.52 11.64 Education High School Bachelor Master and above

78 234 19 23.28 69.85 5.67 Overall Working Experiences ≦ 10 11-20 ≧ 21 210 95 30 62.69 28.36 8.96 Working Experiences in Insurance Industry ≦ 10 11-20 ≧ 21 262 61 12 78.21 18.21 3.58 Working Years in the Present Company ≦ 6 7-15 ≧ 16 243 64 28 75.54 19.10 8.36

Income Per Year

≦ 500,000 500,001-1,000,000 1,000,001-2,000,000 ≧ 2,000,001 142 118 60 15 42.39 35.22 17.91 4.48 Commission Rate (over salary) ≦ 50% 51-80% ≧ 81% 141 78 111 42.09 23.28 33.13 3.5 Item Refinement

Using data obtained the sample of the life insurance salespeople, items with a loading value below 0.5 on any factor, or high cross-loadings on two or more factors, could be

(30)

21

eliminated through the exploratory factor analysis of the first survey. In order to build a strict factor structure, the second survey was used to conduct a confirmatory factor analysis, followed by deleting items with loadings of less than 0.7. This process would form the final SHB scale.

3.6 Reliability Analysis

Internal consistency reliability is used to analyze whether the context was homogeneous, stable and consistent. The composite reliability was estimated to evaluate the internal

consistency of measurement model. And individual item reliability is the square of factor loading. The purpose of assessing the reliability of individual items might determine how well respondents understand the items.

3.7 Validity Analysis

Several validity testing steps were taken is to ensure the completeness of SHB scale.

Firstly, to check the possibility of social desirability bias, the respondents in the second survey had to complete the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability scale (Marlowe &Crowne 1960). The reliability of Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability scale was well demonstrated by Ray (1984).

(31)

22

SHB scale with the Selling Orientation-Customer Orientation (SOCO) Scale. We not only ask salespeople to appraise their performance on SHB but also SOCO. There were 80 respondents usable.

Saxe & Weitz (1982) pointed that customer-oriented selling is the way that salespeople try to help their customers to make purchase decisions and customers‘ needs would be

satisfied. Highly customer-oriented salespeople engage in behaviors aimed at increasing long-term customer satisfaction. On contrary, according to the selling concept, salespeople try to stimulate the demands of products instead of producing products in response to customer needs (Saxe & Weitz 1982). Both SHB and SOCO scales are based on similar concepts: salespeople trying to help their customers so as to increase customer satisfaction. However, SOCO focuses on salespeople‗s in-role behaviors that offer suitable services or products to customers by using their professional knowledge, while SHB focuses on salespeople‗s

extra-role behaviors that try to meet customers‗ needs.We expect that the correlation between SHB and SOCO would not be too high or too low because of their similarities and differences. If the correlation goes too high, it means that the SHB scale was too similar to the SOCO Scale, and would lose the value of this new scale. On the opposite, if the correlation goes too low, it implies that these two scales lack any similarity.

(32)

23

Chapter 4 Data Analysis

4.1 Item Selection

The overall process in selecting items is shown in Figure 4-1, with the steps that have to be carried out in order to form the final SHB scale.

Figure 4- 1: Process in Selecting Items

4.1.1 Exploratory Factor Analysis

Before practicing exploratory factor analysis, we have to assess the suitability of factor analysis. A Kaiser-Meyer-Olk in measure of sampling adequacy (KMO) index less 0.5

indicates the correlation matrix is not suitable for factor analysis (Kaiser 1974). In our sample, the KMO was 0.921 which greater than 0.5. This suggests that the data are adequate for factor analysis (see Table 4-1). In addition, Bartlett's test of sphericity exams whether the correlation

36 Items 5 Dimensions 36 Items 5 Dimensions 36 Items 5 Experts 7 Experts Allocate items to dimensions Items representative 34 Items 5 Dimensions First Survey

EFA: Delete items with loading < .5 or corss-loadings

29 Items 5 Dimensions

CFA: Delete items with loading < .7 or corss-loadings

Second Survey

(33)

24

matrix is an identity one, and the result would also indicate the factor model is inappropriate. If Bartlett's test of sphericity is significant, it concludes that the strength of the relationship among variables is strong. It is a good idea to proceed a factor analysis for the data (Tobias & Carlson 1969). In our sample, the observed significance level is 0.0000.

To identify the major dimensions of SHB, we conducted a principal component factor analysis with a varimax rotation of the first sample. The initial factor analysis extracted five factors and then we eliminated items that did not load strongly on any factor (values below 0.5) or had cross-loadings. Therefore, a total of 2 items were deleted after three iterations. The remaining 34 items were again factor analyzed. Each item was found to load strongly on only one factor. Five factors were generated; they accounted for 68.51% of the variance. They were labeled as follows (see Table 4-2 and Table 4-3):

(1) Practical Assistance: A salesperson uses his own professional or skills to solve

customers‘ problems. This factor had 9 scale items and it explained the largest potion (16.01%) of the total variance.

(2) Social Interaction: Through the interaction in some occasions, a salesperson improves his/her relationship with customers. The second factor explained15.54% of the variance.

(3) Gift Giving: A salesperson shows concern for customers or family members of customers by sending gift. The third factor demonstrated 14.05% of the variance.

(34)

25

(4) Emotional Support: Defined and functioned as an interaction which made customers feel better when they are upset or under pressure. The forth factor accounted for 11.49% of the variance.

(5) Information Sharing: A salesperson voluntarily provides information which meets customers‘ needs.The final factor represented 11.41% of the variance.

Table 4- 1: KMO and Bartlett’s Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olk in Measure of Sampling Adequacy. 0.921 Bartlett's test of sphericity Approx. Chi-square 5404.946 df 561 Sig. .000

Table 4- 2: Total Variance Explained

Dimensions Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % Practical Assistance 5.445 16.014 16.014

Social Interaction 5.285 15.544 31.558 Gift Giving 4.778 14.052 45.610 Information Sharing 3.907 11.491 57.101 Emotional Support 3.878 11.406 68.507

(35)

26

Table 4- 3: Exploratory Factor Analysis Item

Number

Code

Dimensions and Items Factor

Name 1 2 3 4 5

01 PA1 I would strive for customers‘ benefits, even if it would cause conflict of company

interests.* .723

02 PA2 I would strive for customers‘ benefits, even if it would cause conflict of my interests.* .666 03 PA3 I would assist customers to solve their problems, even though it is not my duty. .541 04 PA4 I would provide assistance to solve customers‘ job problems, even though it is not my

duty. .631

05 PA5 I would try my best to let customers have more and more extra benefits (e.g., strive for

reasonable compensation).* .595

06 PA6 If a customer who is not my client meets the problem, I would also assist him. .680 07 PA7 After I solve customers‘ problem, they would obtain results which are higher than their

expectation. .644

08 PA8 I would provide assistance when customers meet emergency, even though that is not my

responsibility. .736

09 PA9 I would deal with a customer‗s emergency as soon as possible if he/she cannot handle it

immediately. .576

10 SI1 When I am off the clock, I would strengthen my relationship with customers by

contacting with them. .633

11 SI2 When I am off the clock, I would hold activities to strengthen my relationship with

(36)

27 Table 4-3: Continued Item

Number

Code

Name 1 2 3 4 5

12 SI3 I would help customers to get in touch with each other if they have demands.* .586

13 SI4 I visit customers ordinarily. .693

14 SI5 I would keep good relationship with customers‘ families and friends. .692

15 SI6 I would call customers caring their lives. .634

16 GG1 I would visit customers with gifts at their special day (e.g., customers‘ birthday,

Christmas, wedding or funeral etc.). .810

17 GG2 I would visit customer‘s families who are sick in the hospital with gifts. .756

18 GG3 I would buy customers presents ordinarily. .816

19 GG4 When I go out of town, I would bring some souvenirs for customers. .610 20 GG5 I would bring customers some presents while visiting them. .768 21 ES1 I would encourage customers when they have difficulties. .742

22 ES2 I would accompany customers who have trouble. .686

23 ES3 When customers are depressed, I would support them as a friend. .784 24 ES4 I would try to cheer customers up when they are depressed. .762

25 ES5 I would comfort customers if they are upset. .759

26 ES6 I would be a good listener if customers need to reveal their feelings. .676 27 ES7 I would show customers that I understand how they feel. .703

28 IS1 I would share daily information with my customers. .601

(37)

28 Table 4-3: Continued Item

Number

Code

Name 1 2 3 4 5

30 IS3 I would provide customers information about anything I knew (e.g. how to apply a job,

travel tips), even though it is not my duty. .790

31 IS4 I would provide information which fits customers‘ interests. .676 32 IS5 I would provide customers information when they have problems I have experienced

with, even it is not my duty (e.g., children education problems). .859 33 IS6 I would provide customers accessible plans, even it is not a part of my job. .676 34 IS7 I would tell customers where they could have assistance with. .773 Note: Extraction method: principal component analysis. Rotation method: Varimax with Kaiser normalization. (*) Items were deleted in the final scale.

(38)

29

Figure 4-2 illustrated the process for exploratory factor analysis (EFA):

Figure 4- 2: Process for Exploratory Factor Analysis

4.1.2 Confirmatory factor analysis

In order to test the factor structure more rigorously, we conducted confirmatory factor analysis by using the second sample; the overall process is shown in Figure 4-3.

Figure 4- 3: Process for Confirmatory Factor Analysis EFA

Repeat this process until no item has low loading or

cross-loadings Deleted Items with Low Loading or Cross-Loadings 34 Items Practical Assistance Social Interaction Gift Giving Emotional Support Information Sharing First-Order CFA

Repeat this process until no item has low loading or cross-loadings

Deleted Items with Low Loading or Cross-Loadings 29 Items Final SHB Scale

(39)

30

The first-order measurement model showed a reasonable model fit, with a ratio of Chi-square to degree of freedom of 2.44, GFI of 0.81, NFI of 0.97, NNFI of 0.98, CFI of 0.98, RFI of 0.97, and RMSEA of 0.070 (see Table 4-5). Hu and Bentler (1999) suggested that the GFI and the AGFI exceed 0.9 means that the model has a good fit. However, some researcher considered that it is kind of conservative if 0.9 is the benchmark (Bagozzi and Yi 1988). The goodness-of-fit statistics which are over and above 0.8 should be appropriate (Cuttance 1987).Thus, the measurement model has a good fit with the data, based on assessment criteria such as GFI, NFI, NNFI, CFI, RFI, and RMSEA.

Most of items loaded significantly and very highly (most > .70) on the factor in the first-order confirmatory factor analysis except item 1, 2, 5, 11, and 12:

(1) I would strive for customers‘ benefits, even if it would cause conflict of company interests.

(2) I would strive for customers‘ benefits, even if it would cause conflict of my interests.

(5) I would try my best to let customers have more and more extra benefits (e.g., strive for reasonable compensation).

(11) When I am off the clock, I would hold activities to strengthen my relationship with customers.

(40)

31

Accordingly, these 5 items were deleted and only 29 items remained (see Table 4-3). The revised first-order measurement model showed an excellent model fit, with a ratio of Chi-square to degree of freedom of 2.22, GFI of 0.85, NFI of 0.98, NNFI of 0.99, CFI of 0.99, RFI of 0.98, and RMSEA of 0.064 (see Table 4-5). In addition, the correlations among each dimension were shown in Figure 4-4:

Figure 4- 4: The Correlation among Each Dimension Practical Assistance Social Interaction Gift Giving Emotional Support Information Sharing .65 .70 .57 .86 .54 .74 .57 .76 .69 .80

(41)

32

Table 4- 4: Data Result of Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Dimension Item Number

Code Name

Factor

Loading T-value Disturbance SMC CR AVE

Practical Assistance 03 PA3 0.80 17.38. 0.35 0.64 0.91 0.62 04 PA4 0.85 18.87 0.28 0.72 06 PA6 0.79 17.04 0.37 0.62 07 PA7 0.72 14.86 0.48 0.52 08 PA8 0.84 18.65 0.29 0.71 09 PA9 0.70 14.25 0.51 0.49 Social Interaction 10 SI1 0.76 15.75 0.42 0.58 0.87 0.63 13 SI4 0.84 18.45 0.29 0.71 14 SI5 0.79 16.68 0.38 0.62 15 SI6 0.77 15.99 0.41 0.59 Gift Giving 16 GG1 0.82 17.89 0.33 0.67 0.92 0.69 17 GG2 0.73 15.05 0.47 0.53 18 GG3 0.85 19.16 0.27 0.72 19 GG4 0.85 19.08 0.27 0.72 20 GG5 0.89 20.39 0.21 0.79

(42)

33 Table 4-4: Continued Dimension Item Number Code Name Factor

Loading T-value Disturbance SMC CR AVE

Emotional Support 21 ES1 0.80 17.41 0.36 0.64 0.94 0.69 22 ES2 0.79 17.01 0.38 0.62 23 ES3 0.90 21.26 0.18 0.81 24 ES4 0.85 19.36 0.27 0.72 25 ES5 0.89 20.85 0.20 0.79 26 ES6 0.87 19.96 0.24 0.76 27 ES7 0.71 14.81 0.49 0.50 Information Sharing 28 IS1 0.81 17.70 0.35 0.66 0.94 0.71 29 IS2 0.71 14.79 0.50 0.50 30 IS3 0.90 21.32 0.18 0.81 31 IS4 0.87 19.94 0.24 0.76 32 IS5 0.91 21.71 0.16 0.83 33 IS6 0.85 19.05 0.29 0.72 34 IS7 0.81 17.88 0.34 0.66

(43)

34

Table 4- 5: Indices of CFA

Index Suggested Standard First-Order CFA Revised First-Order CFA 2-4 2.44 2.22 GFI (Goodness of Fit Index) > 0.9 0.81 0.85 AGFI (Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index) > 0.9 0.78 0.82 NFI (Normed Fit Index) > 0.9 0.97 0.98 NNFI (Non- Normed Fit Index) > 0.9 0.98 0.99 CFI (Comparative Fit Index) > 0.9 0.98 0.99 RFI (Relative Fit Index) > 0.9 0.97 0.98 RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approx.) < 0.05 well 0.05-0.08 mediate 0.08-0.10 mild 0.070 0.064

(44)

35 4.2 Reliability Test

4.2.1 Individual Item Reliability

As shown in Table 4-4, after the revised first-order measurement, all reliability of items are desirable because they all exceeded the level of 0.7.

4.2.2 Composite Reliability (CR)

The composite reliability ranged from 0.87 to 0.94 (see Table 4-4). All were greater than the benchmark of 0.60 recommended by Fornell and Larcker (1981). This showed that all measures had strong and adequate reliability.

4.3 Validity Test

4.3.1 Convergent Validity

Average Variance Extracted (AVE) is used as measure of convergent validity. AVE was proposed by Fornell and Larker (1981) as a measure of the shared or common variance in a latent variable, and if AVE goes higher, the latent variable has higher reliability and

convergent validity. As shown in Table 4-4, the average variance extracted for all measures also exceeded the benchmark of 0.50 recommended.

(45)

36 4.3.2 Discriminant Validity

Discriminant Validity presumes that one can empirically differentiate a construct from other constructs that may be similar, and can determine what is unrelated to the construct. As mentioned earlier, both of SHB and SOCO are customer oriented helping behaviors.

Salespeople devoting themselves to SHB or customer-orientation try to meet customer needs and increase customer satisfaction. SHB invests principally in extra-role behaviors,

nevertheless, SOCO mainly focuses on in-role behaviors. Hence, we extrapolated that the correlation would be not high, although SHB scale would be significantly correlated with SOCO scale.

Using the second sample of 335 salespeople, SHB showed a moderate positive

correlation with SOCO (r = 0.441, p < .001) (see Table 4-6) which indicated the discriminant validity among these two scales.

4.4 Test for Response Bias

Moorman and Padsakoff (1992) declared that respondents are prone to create a

particular impression, which is a kind of response bias. Because respondents answer questions according to what they think the most acceptable to society instead of what they really think, the bias may occur. To check the possibility of social desirability bias, the respondents also completed the Marlowe-Crowne Short-Form Social Desirability Scale (Edmund & Florence

(46)

37

2005). As a result, all correlations are small and insignificant, that is to say, the SHB items are not infected by a social desirability factor (see Table 4-6).

Table 4- 6: Correlations with SHB Scale SOCO Scale MC Social Desirability Response Scale SHB Scale 0.441** 0.012

(47)

38

Chapter 5 Conclusions

5.1 Results

A 29-item Salespeople Helping Behavior (SHB) was developed to measure salespeople‘s extra-role assistance for their customers. The five identified and verified dimensions—Practical Assistance, Social Interaction, Gift Giving, Emotional Support, and Information Sharing—had a significant impact on overall SHB. The reliability and validity of the measure were demonstrated. Cronbach alpha for overall SHB scale and each of five dimensions were .965, .903, .868, .915, .939, and .939 respectively. In short, SHB scale and each dimension showed excellent internal consistency. By testing discriminant validity, we perceive that salespeople helping behaviors and customer-orientation behaviors are similar concepts but with particular differences. The level of correlation was moderate (r = 0.441, p < .001) which connoted that salesperson who engage in high SHB are not consequentially highly customer-orientated.

5.2 Managerial Implications

More and more salespeople often engaged in SHB actively. According to Sergio and Salvador (2005), the role of ethical salesperson behavior is defined as a long-run salespersons‘

(48)

39

conduct that enables them to gain at the satisfaction of the customer. And the perceived ethical behavior plays a major role on affecting the quality of the buyer-seller relationship. Therefore, it is important to assess SHB which is one kind of ethical salesperson behavior. However, SHB was hard to be observed and assessed directly. We tried to determine whether there was any instrument to measure salespeople helping behaviors with this research. A 29-item SHB scale was developed to quantify salespeople‘s extra-role assistance to their customers after a succession of processes. It can be a useful diagnostic tool for any organization. Sales

managers not only can measure salespeople‘s helping behavior, but also can find a way to inspire salespeople to put more efforts on SHB by using the validated scale.

5.3 Limitation of the Research

The study has its limitations. It must assess the content-related evidence of validity as developing a scale. Owing to the time limitation, we did not retrieve enough questionnaires. Moreover, another form of construct validity is nomological validity. We did not assay the nomological validity due to fewer SHB research to demonstrate the antecedence of SHB. The other main limitation was that our data were collected from a single industry, the life

insurance industry. Generalization of our five-dimension scale still needs to be viewed with caution. The second limitation was that there were 190 usable samples in the first survey. For scale‘s stability, much more samples in the first survey would have been perfect.

(49)

40 5.4 Future Research

In this study, we only compared SHB with SOCO scale. For reinforcing the value of SHB, we attempt to take more helping behavior scale such as OCB, POB, and Social Support into account to distinguish them from SHB in the future. And we will try to find out whether salespeople‘s overall performance can be affected by SHB in future research, so that

researchers can realize the importance of SHB.

Besides, researchers can explore what factors would affect SHB. Many studies have proposed that some factors affected extra-role behaviors. Netemeyer et al. (1997) suggested that fairness in a reward system is one of the influences on OCB. Mood also is a factor to influence helping behavior (Brief and Motowidlo 1960, Cialdini, Darby, Vincent 1973).

Finally, researchers can collect data from different industries for making this SHB scale generally applicable, and then they can extend the research by using this scale.

(50)

41

References

Arndt, Johan (1967). Role of Product-Related Conversations in the Diffusion of a New Product. Journal of Marketing Research, 4 (August), 29-95.

Amato, Paul R. (1985). An Investigation of Planned Helping Behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 19 (2), 232-52.

Bagozzi R.P., Yi Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94.

Barrera, M. Jr., Sandler, I. N., Ramsay, T. B. (1981). Preliminary Development of a Scale of Social Support: Studies on College Students. American Journal of Community

Psychology 9(4), 435-447.

Baruch, Y., O‘creevy, M. F., Hind, P. and Gadot, E. V. (2004). Prosocail Behavior and Job Performance: Does the Need for Control and the Need for Achievement Make a Difference? Social Behavior and Personality, 32 (4), 399-412.

Batson, C. D. (1983). Influence of Self-Reported Distress and Empathy on Egoistic versus Altruistic Motivation to Help. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(3), 706-718.

Batson, C. D., Batson, J. G., Griffitt, C. A., Barrientos, S., Brandt, J. R., Sprengelmeyer, P., Bayly, M. J. (1989). Negative-State Relief and the Empathy—Altruism Hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(6), 922-933.

Batson, C. Daniel (1991).The Altruism Question: A Scientific Exploration of Why We Help One Another. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Eribaum Associates.

Bateman, T. S., & Organ, D. W. (1983). Job Satisfaction and the Good Soldier: The Relationship Between Affect and Employee ―Citizenship.‖ Academy of Management Journal, 26, 587-595.

Baumann, D. J., Cialdini, R. B., & Kendrick, D. T. (1981). Altruism as Hedonism: Helping and Self-Gratification as Equivalent Responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(6), 1039-1046.

(51)

42

Berkowitz, L. (1972), ―Social Norms, Feelings and Other Factors Affecting Helping and Altruism.‖ In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol 6, 63-108). New York: Academic Press.

Bettencourt, L. A., & Brown, S. W. (1997). Contact Employees: Relationships Among Workplace Fairness, Job Satisfaction and Prosocial Service Behaviors. Journal of Retailing, 73(1), 39-61.

Blau, P. (1964), Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.

Bloch, Peter H. (1986). Product Enthusiasm: Many Questions, A Few Answers. in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 13, Richard J. Lutz, ed. Provo, UT: Association for

Consumer Research, 539-543.

Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial Organizational Behaviors. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 710-725.

Chang, C.- C. (2005). A Typology of Salespeople Helping Behavior. Unpublished master dissertation.

Chang, C.- C., Chang, Y.- J., Chiang, Y.-H. (2009). The SHB Scale Development and Validation: A Measure of Salespeople‘s Helping Behavior Directed at Customers. Conference in Selling and Sales Management in Houston, TX, April.

.

Cheng, P.-Y. (2007). A Typology of Salespeople Helping Behavior－A Case of the Life Insurance Industry. Unpublished master dissertation.

Chi, N.-W., Chen, H.-Y., Yang, M.-Y., Cheng F.-C. and Tsai, W.-C., (2008). The Development of multidimensional Person-Job Fit Scale (MPJS). Journal of Management, 25(5), 577-598.

Churchill, G. A., Jr. (1979). A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs. Journal of Marketing Research (pre-1986), 16(000001), 64-73.

Cialdini, R. B. (1976). Altruism as Hedonism: A Social Development Perspective on the Relationship of Negative Mood State and Helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 907-914.

(52)

43

Cialdini, R. B., Darby, B. L., & Vincent, J. E. (1973). Transgression and Altruism: A Case for Hedonism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9(6), 502-516.

Cialdini, R. B., Schaller, M., Houlihan, D., Arps, K., Fultz, J., & Beaman, A. L. (1987). Empathy-Based Helping: Is It Selflessly or Selfishly Motivated? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(4), 749-758.

Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983), Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.

Curren, Mary T. and Valerie S. Folkes (1987). Attributional Influences on Consumers' Desires to Communicate About Products. Psychology and Marketing, 4, 31-45.

Cuttance, P., Ecob R. (1987). Structural Modeling by Example: Applications in Educational,

Sociological, and Behavioral Research. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Dichter, Emest (1966). How Word-of-Mouth Advertising Works. Harvard Business Review, 44 (November/December), 147-166.

Duncan, C. (2004). Emotional Support, Conflict, Depression, and Relationship Satisfaction in a Romantic Partner. The Journal of Psychology, 138(6), 532-542.

Edmund, R. T., & Florence, T. T. P. (2005). Reliability Among Senior Managers of the Marlowe-Crowne Short-Form Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Business and Psychology, 19(4), 541-554.

Farh, J., Podsakoff, P.M., & Organ, D.W. (1990). Accounting for Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Leader Fairness and Task Scope versus Satisfaction. Journal of Management, 14, 705-721.

Feick, L. F., & Price, L. L. (1987). The Market Maven: A Diffuser of Marketplace Information. Journal of Marketing, 51(1), 83-97.

(53)

44

Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Reaserach, 18, 39-50.

George, J. M. (1991). State or Trait: Effects of Positive Mood on Prosocial Behaviors at Work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 299-307.

Gottlieb. (1978). The Development and Application of A Classification Scheme of Informal Helping Behaviors. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 10(2), 105-115.

Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161-178.

Hartman, Cathy L. and Pamela L. Kiecker (1991). Marketplace Influencers at the Point of Purchase: The Role of Purchase Pals in Consumer Decision Making. in Enhancing Knowledge Development in Marketing: 1991. Educators' Proceedings, Vol. 2, Mary Gilly and Robert Dwyer, eds. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 461-69. Higie, R. A., Price, L. L., & Feick, L. F. (1987). Types and Amount of Word-of-Mouth

Communications About Retailers. Journal of Retailing, 63(3), 260-278.

Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A Brief Tutorial on the Development of Measures for Use in Survey Questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1(1), 104-121.

Hoffman, M. L. (1981). Is Altruism Part of Human Nature? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(5), 121-137.

House, James S. and J. A. Wells (1978). Occupational Stress, Social Support, and Health, in Reducing Occupational Stress: Proceedings of a Conference, Mcleon, Black and Colligan, eds., Washington, DC: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 8-29.

Hu, L. and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.

Kahana, Eva and Elizabeth Midlarsky (1983). The Elderly Helper. paper presented at the 37th Annual Scientific Meetings of the Gerontological Society of America, San Francisco, CA, (November).

(54)

45

Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36. Katz, D., Kahn, R. L. (1966). The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: Wiley. Kenrick, D. T. (1979). A Step in the Socialization of Altruism as Hedonism: Effects of

Negative Mood on Children‘s Generosity under Public and Private Conditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 613-622.

King, Charles W. and John O. Summers (1967). Dynamics of Interpersonal Communications: An Interaction Dyad. in Risk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behavior, Donald F. Cox, ed. Boston: Harvard University Press.

Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A Quantitative Approach to Content Validity. Presonnel Psychology, 563-575.

MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Fetter, R. (1993). The Impact of Organizational Citizenship Behavior on Evaluations of Salesperson Performance. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 70-80.

Marlowe, D. P. C. D. (1960). A New Scale of Social Desirability Independent of Psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24(4), 349-354.

McNeely, Bonnie L. and Meglino, Bruce M. (1994). The Role of Dispositional and

Situational Antecedents on Prosocial Organizational Behavior: An Examination of the Intended Beneficiaries of Prosocial Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79, No.6, 836-844.

Moorman, C., & Price, L. L. (1989). Consumer Policy Remedies and Consumer Segment Interactions. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 8, 181-203.

Moorman, R. H., & Podsakoff, P. M. (1992). A Meta-Analytic Review and Empirical Test of the Potential Confounding Effects of Social Desirability Response Sets in Organizational Behavior Research. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65(2), 131-149.

Motowidlo, S. J. (1984). Does Job Satisfaction Lead to Consideration and Personal Sensitivity? Academy of Management Journal, 27, 910-915.

(55)

46

Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S., McKee, D. O., McMurrian, R. (1997). An investigation into the antecedents of organizational citizenship behaviors in a personal selling context. Journal of Marketing, 61 (3), 85-98.

O‘Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational Commitment and Psychological Attachment: The Effects of Compliance, Identification and Internalization on Pro-social Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492-499.

Organ, Dennis W. (1988a). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome. Lexington MA: Lexington Books.

Organ, Dennis W. (1988b). A Restatement Of The Satisfaction-Performance Hypothesis. Journal of Management, 14(4), 547-557.

Organ, Dennis W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It‘s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10 (2), 85-97.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.

Parasuraman, A., Valarie, A. Z., & Arvind, M. (2005). E-S-QUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Assessing Electronic Service Quality. Journal of Service Research, 7(3), 213-233. Posdakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Robert H. Moorman, and Richard Fetter (1990).

Transformational Leader Behaviors and Their Effects on Followers‘ Trust in Leader, Satisfaction, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 1 (Summer), 107-142.

Posdakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1994). Organizational Citizenship Behaviors and Sales Unit Effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(3), 351-363.

Price, L. L., & Feick, L. F. (1984). The Role of Interpersonal Sources in External Search: An Informational Perspective. Advances in Consumer Research, 11(1), 250-255.

Price, L. L., Feick, L. F., & Guskey, A. (1995). Everyday Market Helping Behavior. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14(2), 255-266.

(56)

47

Puffer, S. M. (1987 ). Prosocial Behavior, Noncompliant Behavior, and Work Performance Among Commission Salespeople. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(4), Nov. 1987, 615-621.

Ray, J. J. (1984). The Reliability of Short Social Desirability Scales. The Journal of Social Psychology, 123(1), 133-134.

Richins, M. L. (1983). Negative Word-of-Mouth by Dissatisfied Consumers: A Pilot Study. Journal of Marketing, 47(1), 68-78.

Rosenhan, D. L., Salovey, P., & Hargis, K. (1981). The Joys of Helping: Focus of Attention Mediates the Impact of Positive Affect on Altruism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(5), 899-905.

Saxe, R., & Weitz, B. A. (1982). The SOCO Scale: A Measure of the Customer Orientation of Salespeople. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(3), 343-351.

Scholl, R.W., Cooper, E. A., & McKenna, J. F. (1987). Referent Selection in Determining Equity Perceptions: Differential Effects on Behavioral and Attitudinal Outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 40, 113-124.

Sergio, R., & Salvador, R. (2005). Relationship Outcomes of Perceived Ethical Sales Behavior: The Customer's Perspective. Journal of Business Research, 58(4), 439-445. Slama, Mark E. and Terrell G. Williams (1990). Generalization of the Market Maven's

Information Provision Tendency Across Product Categories. in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17, Thomas K. Srull, ed. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 48-52.

Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Nature and Antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-663.

Tian, K. T., William, O. B., Gary, L.H. (2001). Consumers' Need for Uniqueness: Scale Development and Validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 50-66.

Tobias, S., Carlson, J. E. (1969). Brief Report: Bartlett‘s Test of Sphericity and Chance Findings in Factor Analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 4(3), 375 – 377.

(57)

48

Trickett, R. E. M. a. E. J. (1980). Task Force Report: Social Networks as Mediators of Social support. Community Mental Health Journal, 16(1), 27-44.

Vaux, A., Riedel, Sharon, Stewart, Doreen. (1987). Modes of Social Support: The Social Support Behaviors (SS-B) Scale. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15(2), 209-237.

Vroom, V., & Deci, E. (1974). Hammondsworth: Penguin. Management and Motivation. Worthy, J. C. (1986). Overachievement at work: A class of pro-social behavior. Paper

presented at the meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago.

Yang, Z., Cai, S., Zhou, Z., Zhou, N. (2005). Development and Validation of An Instrument to Measure User Perceived Service Quality of Information Presenting Web Portals.