Sales technology research: a review and future research agenda

Figures & data

Table 1. Sales technology conceptualization over the years.

Design and dimensions	Salesperson-level conceptualization
Salesforce Allocation Software Packages	Software programs aided by computer processing power that allow salespeople and managers to optimally allocate their time across a series of customers or product lines (Parasuraman and Day 1977). Literature support: Mahmoud, Rice, and Malhotra (1988); Zoltners and Sinha 1980)
Sales Force Automation (SFA)	Different combinations of hardware and software applications that transform repetitive and routine manual processes into automated processes (Rivers and Dart 1999).Literature support: Buttle, Ang, and Iriana (2006); Morgan and Inks (2001); Parthasarathy and Sohi (1997)
Sales-based CRM systems	Customer-centric technology to formulate strategies to achieve effectiveness in selling approaches (Hunter and Perreault 2007).Literature support: Itani et al. (2020; Rapp, Agnihotri, and Forbes (2008); Tanner et al. (2005)
Sales Force-related Information Technology	Technology tools that pertain to operational CRM and support the customer-interacting aspects of the firm (Ahearne, Hughes, and Schillewaert 2007). Literature support: Ahearne et al. (2008); Sundaram et al. (2007)
Social Media Technology	Social interaction-enhancing technologies that salespeople can utilize to generate social content and develop social networks (Agnihotri et al. 2012).Literature support: Andzulis, Panagopoulos, and Rapp (2012); Chaker et al. (2022); Schendzielarz, Alavi, and Guba (2022)
Social CRM	Unique combination of social media technologies and customer-centric management systems that can lead to customer satisfaction, loyalty, and retention (Trainor et al. 2014).Literature support: Agnihotri et al. (2017); Rapp and Panagopoulos (2012)
Artificial Intelligence (AI)	Technology with human-like thinking capabilities, such as replicating the problem-solving process, making predictions of various outcomes, suggesting alternative strategies, and offering advice to a sales professional (Collins 1984a).Literature support: Syam and Sharma (2018); Singh et al. (2019)
Sales-based digital technologies	Digital assets that are available for salespeople to execute synchronous and asynchronous exchange processes to create customer value (Mullins and Agnihotri 2022).Literature support: Badrinarayanan, Madhavaram, and Manis (2022); Fischer, Seidenstricker, and Poeppelbuss (2023)

Figure 1. Evolving journey of sales technology.

Table 2. Technology-mediated communication.

Task Objectives Requiring Communication Enablement	Technology Focus & Illustrative Tools	Task Outcomes and Associated Communication Aspects: Information Reach Information Use Information Accuracy Quantity of Information Shared Speed of Information Sharing	Illustrative Studies
To provide both live audio and visual communication	Focus: Internal and Shared Tools: Audio-video conferencing/Zoom	Enabling live two-way communication between: Salesperson and customers Salesperson and manager Sales managers and sales leaders Comm. aspects: A, B, D, & E	Marshall, Moncrief, and Lassk (1999); Rangarajan, Sharma, Lyngdoh, and Paesbrugghe (2021)
To enhance salesperson communication with customers and manager To provide live audio communication	Focus: Internal and Shared Tools: Cellular phones/emails	Enabling live two-way communication between: Salesperson and customers Salesperson and manager Sales managers and sales leaders Solve customer problems real time Comm. aspects: A, B, D, & E	Swenson and Parrella 1992; Athaide, Meyers, and Wilemon (2003); Moncrief and Cravens (1999)
To enhance salesperson communication with customers and manager	Focus: Internal and Shared Tools: Computer/ Laptops	Codify common admin tasks and sales activities) Provide reports (e.g. expense reports) Reduce errors in forecasting Improve sales call planning Improve Internal coordination Comm. aspects: A, B, C, D, & E	Anderson (1996); Collins (1984); Hughes (1983); Keilor, Bashaw, and Pettijohn (1997); Moncrief, Lamb, and Mackay (1991)
To improve the relationship development process by coordinating internal customer-related sales, service, and marketing tasks	Focus: Internal and Shared Tools: CRM	Automate routine tasks Provide reports about firm and individual salesperson performance Codify common tasks and processes Coordinate tasks within and across functions Comm. aspects: A, B, C, D, & E	Ahearne, Hughes, and Schillewaert (2007); Buehrer, Senecal, and Bolman Pullins (2005); Hunter and Perreault (2007); Tanner and Shipp (2005); Zablah, Bellenger, and Johnston (2004)
To enhance salesperson communication with customers and manager	Focus: Internal and Shared Tools: Electronic Data Interchange	Helps with sales by providing more time for non-order taking functions Ability to call on more customers Lower error rates Better access to diagnostic reports Order processing by reducing or eliminating the personnel needed to receive orders Faster order response, and better accuracy Comm. aspects: A, B, C, D, & E	Hill and Swenson (1994); Maltz and Srivastava (1997)
To focus on the sales process and managing prospects. The communication intention is to increase sales and conversion (from prospect to customer). Initiates, automates, and optimizes the interface between salespeople and prospective and existing customers, pipeline management, and the sales management process	Focus: Internal and Shared Tools: Salesforce Automation (SFA)	File regular reports electronically Increasing efficiency (e.g. provides salespeople with faster access to information, reducing time required to prepare for client presentation Improve close rates Improve communication with clients Raising average sale price using more accurate and timely pricing information Comm. aspects: A, B, C, D, & E	Buehrer, Senecal, and Bolman Pullins (2005); Erffmeyer and Johnson (2001); Parthasarathy and Sohi (1997); Rivers and Dart (1999)
To focus on the sales process and managing prospects. The communication intention is to increase sales and conversion (from prospect to customer).	Focus: Internal Tools: social media technology	General communication with manager and customers Send and receive information from prospects and clients Provide superior information exchange, reciprocity, and problem solving Comm. aspects: A, B, C, D, & E	Agnihotri et al. (2016); Chaker, Nowlin, Pivonka, Itani, and Agnihotri, Mani, et al. (2022); Ogilvie et al. (2018)
To offer self-paced training programs to salespeople	Focus: Internal Tools: Video Enhanced Sales Training	Provide access to training information to salespeople Codify training information and method Comm. aspects: A, B, & C	Honeycutt, McCarty, and Howe (1993)

• “Internal” refers to Intra-organization communications

• “Shared” refers to external communication between customer and salesperson (e.g., via social media)

• Information reach refers to the number of people that can gain access to information as well as the distance between people and the information source.

• Information use refers to the number of people who will consume and use the information.

• Information accuracy refers to the “quality of being true or correct even in small details” (Collins dictionary).

• Quantity of Information Shared refers to the amount of information that can be shared

• Speed of Information Sharing refers to the speed with which information can be shared.

Table 3. Future research directions.

Theme #1: Building Consensus Establishing awareness RQ1. Who do salespeople trust most when considering whether to adopt novel sales technologies? What can management do to alleviate age-old concerns that new technologies will replace salespeople rather than supplement them? RQ2. How might the introduction of more “ubiquitous” sales technologies (e.g. “Internet of things”) impact the discipline’s need for novel theories that can adequately explain technology adoption and usage? RQ3. What is the appropriate pace at which new sales technologies should be adopted by sales organizations? How appropriate are conservative “pilot” programs in an era of rapid change, where being left behind is costly? RQ4. How will sales organizations leverage technology to create dedicated sales enablement functions to help bridge the traditional gap between sales and marketing? How can the continued introduction of new sales technologies help to bridge this gap, rather than “silo” the sales function even further? RQ5. What can sales leaders do to reduce skepticism surrounding introducing new sales technologies? What role should frontline salespeople play in any decision-making processes regarding the potential introduction of new technologies that will impact their core job functions? RQ6. What impact will the cost of new sales technologies have in potentially creating a technological divide between Western nations and countries in the developing world? How will this potentially impact multi-national organizations coordinating salesforces across geographic and temporal borders? RQ7. How will artificial intelligence (AI) enabled, large language algorithms (i.e. Chat GPT) impact inside selling and customer service roles? What sales roles—and what type of salespeople—will be made redundant with the emergence, and continued improvement, of these technologies? What stakeholders will be involved in decision-making regarding the use of these technologies? Will salespeople have a seat at the table of these discussions that may result in their replacement? RQ8. How does the increasing introduction of AI into the sales function impact the skills, and theories, that the next generation of sales researchers will need for their toolkits? How might the introduction of AI and other technologies impact the relationships that sales academics have with industry? Do large language algorithms make sales professors and educators seem passe to Generations Z and Alpha? Establishing utility (e.g. Forecasting) RQ9. What impact might forecasting tools have on salespeople’s autonomy? Stated differently, will a profession long known for providing freedom and discretion become one where practitioners increasingly adhere to computer output? RQ10. How might forecasting tools evolve so that not only salesperson, but also customer, inputs will be required to make optimal projections? How can the salesperson-customer relationship evolve so that these projections can be made in tandem? RQ11. How can Bayesian techniques be used in updating forecasts in real time? How frequently should forecasts be updated? When new information arises, will salespeople and their managers effectively separate “signal from noise”? RQ12. With the emergence of AI and increasing computer power needed to analyze big data, how accurate can the sales discipline be in conducting sales forecasts? Moreover, how involved will salespeople, and their managers, be in providing input data in making these forecasts? Stated differently, how far are we from a time where artificial intelligence tells salespeople exactly what to do during every minute of the work day? RQ13. How might the increased accuracy in forecasts—and the associated increases in efficiency—afforded by technological advances impact the amount of territory that salespeople can cover? If so, what might happen to those salespeople whose territories get usurped by their colleagues?

Theme #2: Sales Technology Training RQ14. How has sales technology influenced sales training? Have technology efficiencies in sales training led to positive sales outcomes? What changes would have to occur for salespeople to initially accept then reject new sales technology? And, what could the firm and sales management do to prevent this occurrence? RQ15. Does a combination of online and in-person training increase sales outcomes and decrease costs? What are the limitations of sales technology-based training in terms of basic capabilities compared to higher level selling skills? RQ16. How will the increased prevalence of AI impact sales training? Will an increasing amount of training be focused on how salespeople can use AI (e.g. ChatGPT) to perform core job functions? How will this impact the importance of training in soft skills? Will this increase the importance of this training as customers yearn for the opportunity to talk to “real” people, or will customer contact be reduced to the point that the successful manipulation of technology becomes the most critical factor in sales success? RQ17. How will sales education evolve to account for a rapidly changing technological landscape? Do sales educators have the necessary background and education to be able to successfully shepherd the next generation of salespeople?

Theme #3: Sales Technology Adoption RQ18. Will the cost of new sales technologies prove to be a barrier to adoption for smaller and medium-sized firms? Or, will smaller firms be more likely to adopt new technologies due to their ability, and need, to be flexible and agile? RQ19. What skills (e.g. coding) more associated with Information Technology (IT) professionals will become in vogue in the sales function? How will this impact where sales organizations look for talent? RQ20. How will salespeople balance the presumed efficacy of novel technologies with privacy? How might this potential skepticism be qualified by a salesperson’s membership in a generational cohort (e.g. Gen Z v. older generations)? RQ21. How will AI and Augmented Reality (AR) fit into organizations’ current technology landscape? Do “intelligent” technologies provide a threat for incumbent technologies and salespeople or are they a catalyst for improving them? RQ22. How will theories of technology adoption (i.e. TAM, TAMU, see Venkatesh et al. 2003) evolve in an era where technology will become so ubiquitous so that any hesitancy in adoption will be akin to foregoing oxygen? RQ23. How might barriers to technology adoption morph from being centered around cost and difficulty in use to issues centered around ethics (e.g. privacy, fears of redundancy, etc.)?

Theme #4: Sales Technology Use and Performance RQ24. Given the ever present goal of using technology to increase productivity, at what point does the constant pursuit of increased efficiency through technology usage backfire? Stated differently, with the increasing ubiquity of AI, and with the development of time-freeing technologies such as autonomous vehicles, will sales organizations hit an inevitable wall in terms of how much efficiency they can expect from salespeople? RQ25. With the use of sales technology becoming increasingly prevalent, will it behoove sales organizations, and their technology providers, to partner with university sales programs to ensure that collegiate sales students are receiving the necessary training on the types of technologies that they will use in the workplace? Will this also have the ancillary effect of increasing buy-in for technology usage as these sales students become professional salespeople? RQ26. What scholastic populations are going to be more amenable to technology usage as sales professionals? Is it a function of how much sales technology a student uses as part of their university curriculum? If so, given the likelihood that business, computer science, and engineering students use technology to a greater extent than most liberal arts students as part of their respective curriculums, does this restrict the populations, and associated perspectives, from which sales organizations can effectively recruit? RQ27. Given the challenges that sales organizations traditionally have in terms of gaining buy-in from salespeople to use technology, what adoption percentage should sales organizations strive for in terms of their salesforce’s use of what is likely an increasing number of technological tools? RQ28. Given the importance of sales manager role modeling in relation to driving salesperson behavioral change, how might older sales managers—and their salespeople—adapt in a world in which the role-out of novel sales technologies becomes increasingly ubiquitous? Does sales research need to focus on the importance of sales manager—rather than salesperson—adaptability and agility?

Theme #5: Shared Technology RQ29. How do digital retailer endpoints play a role in the coopetition of sales technology and product manufacturers? Where can salespeople gain competitive advantages with industry standard technologies? RQ30. What are the implications of implementing APIs that link sales-customers’ technology systems together? To what extent does this improve relationships with shared data or hinder growth with lack of face-to-face contact? RQ31. Will global networks evolve to the point where salespeople no longer have specific retail customers, but instead a single endpoint to sell to? Is maintaining accurate data on global networks the new form of relationship selling? RQ32. With the increasing prevalence of AI, how far into the future are we from scenarios where the customer’s technology will be communicating with the salesperson’s technology, independent of any human input? If so, will this free up both the buying and selling centers to focus on longer-term strategic issues rather than more mundane interactions? RQ33. Will the sharing of private company data via technology become so commonplace so as to reduce privacy concerns and fears of distrust amongst vendors and customers? Will data breaches be more common and, if so, will they be as harmful? Will “proprietary” take on a new meaning in an AI world of “deep fakes” of both images and voice?

Theme #6: Technology Mediated Communication RQ34. How likely are sales organizations to make use of AI enabled tools that replicate the images and voices of their salespeople? If so, what sorts of licensing deals will salespeople strike to with their organizations to make this permissible? Or, will sales organizations own the rights to the labor of both their salespeople, and their AI-generated avatars? RQ35. What is the optimum level of face-to-face communication? As technology—and AI—becomes all-encompassing, will there be a backlash from customers who prefer to speak “with a real-person” even if that mode of communication is more expensive? Moreover, are we nearing a point where face-to-face communication becomes less effective than computer mediated communication in answering customer queries? RQ36. How will improved technologies change the sales training industry? When will we see the end of sales training that resembles an instructor teaching to a room of salespeople, with little or no customization or acknowledgement of different learning modalities? Similarly, how will these improved technologies change the role of collegiate sales education? RQ37. How will improved sales technologies impact the role of the sales manager? If salespeople are able to receive effective coaching, feedback, time allocation advice, etc. from AI-enabled technologies, what will sales managers need to do to provide value to their direct reports, and their organizations more generally? RQ38. With the increasing ubiquity of technology-mediated communication in all facets of life, will customers expect an almost instantaneous response from salespeople to their queries and, if so, how will this affect the adoption rate of smart technologies that can respond instantaneously to customer queries, and how does this subsequently affect the job prospects of salespeople?

Table

Reference	Journal	Research Focus	Theoretical Lens	Sample (Country + Context)	Key Findings
Pre-internet Era (1971–1990)
Lodish (1971)	ManSci	Adoption (Salesforce Allocation Software)	NA	NA	The author discusses a salesperson effort allocation system called CALLPLAN, which he states is easy to use, and is best used for repetitive selling situations.
Montgomery, Silk, and Zaragoza (1971)	ManSci	Adoption (Salesforce Allocation Software)	NA	NA	The author discusses a software program that helps salespeople allocate their time and focus across their product lines. The program is housed on an interactive computer that requires salesperson input to parameterize the model.
Lodish (1975)	JMR	Adoption (Salesforce Allocation Software)	NA	NA	The author introduces a salesforce allocation program, and provides an overview of the math underpinning the algorithm.
Armstrong (1976)	CMR	Adoption (Salesforce Allocation Software)	NA	NA	The author discusses a salesperson effort allocation application called SCHEDULE and gives much of the math underpinning the software algorithm.
Parasuraman and Day (1977)	JMR	Adoption (Salesforce Allocation Software)	NA	NA	The author introduces a salesforce allocation program, and provides an overview of the math underpinning the algorithm.
Lodish (1980)	JM	Adoption	NA	NA	The author introduces a salesforce allocation program and provides an overview of the math underpinning the algorithm.
Zoltners and Sinha (1980)	ManSci	Adoption (Salesforce Allocation Software)	NA	NA	The authors provide a framework for salesperson allocation software programs.
Hughes (1983)	HBR	Adoption (Computers)	NA	NA	This article advocated the use of computers in the sales function, including forecasting as well as accounts and time management. The author also reviews various applications like spreadsheets. And the embarrassment that would cause.
Collins (1984a)	JPSSM	NA	NA	NA	The author argues for the salesforce to be outfitted with portable computers.
Collins (1984b)	JPSSM	NA	NA	NA	Sales Edge software helps salespeople approach customers optimally based on a series of inputs from the salesperson.
Collins (1984c)	JPSSM	NA	NA	NA	The author introduces a new special section on microcomputer applications.
Caywood and Bauer (1986)	JPSSM	Adoption (Electronic Bulletin Boards)	NA	NA	This article dealt with a recommendation for PSE and other sales organizations, such as the Direct Selling Education Foundation (DSEF), to adopt an electronic bulletin board (EBB) where best practices could be shared.
Moncrief, Lamb, and Dielman (1986)	JPSSM	Use (Telephonic Sales)	NA	56 salespeople	The authors interview salespeople to ascertain their overall attitudes toward their job, as well as their attitudes toward telemarketing.
Clopton and Barksdale (1987)	JAMS	Adoption (Computers)	NA	NA	The potential for using microcomputers as negotiation partners and voice chronography software (i.e. voice to text), and how it can be used to improve sales effectiveness.
Collins and Mauritson (1987)	JPSSM	NA	NA	NA	The article reviewed existing sales forecasting software, with directions on where to purchase the software, as well as its retail price.
Collins, Carey, and Mauritson (1987)	JPSSM	NA	NA	NA	The article reviews a few different packages for making maps that can be used to increase call efficiency.
Dalrymple (1987)	IJF	Use (Computers)	NA	134 managers	This article surveyed managers about the ubiquity of computer use in sales forecasting. Interestingly, larger companies were more likely to use computers, and companies that used computers were less likely to have errors in forecasting. Some respondents indicated they would be more likely to use computers if they were easier to program, etc.
Goslar (1987)	JAMS	Adoption (Computers)	NA	NA	The author explores why microcomputers were adopted much more readily than other technological advances.
Johnson and Meiners (1987)	JPSSM	NA	NA	NA	The article serves as an introduction to telemarketing which, the author(s) state, has been around since the 1960s. The author(s) also state that telemarketing is an example of the growing trend of direct marketing.
Mentzer, Schuster, and Roberts (1987)	JAMS	Use (Computers)	NA	342 Marketing Professionals	The authors examined computer usage at various firms. While mainframes were still predominant, an increasingly large number of companies were starting to use microcomputers.
Steinberg and Plank (1987)	JAMS	Adoption (Expert Systems)	NA	NA	The authors advocate for adopting expert systems in the sales function (by sales managers). The exemplar system (SELL! SELL! SELL!) appears to be a rudimentary CRM system.
Wedell and Hempeck (1987)	JPSSM	Adoption (General)	NA	NA	The authors advocate for the increased usage of technology in the sales and marketing functions. The authors contend that marketing and sales is often the last functional area to automate, but that sales/marketing function would be the most impacted if more fully automated.
Beltramini (1988)	JPSSM	NA	NA	252 technology salespeople	The study examined the information acquisition strategies of high-tech salespeople.
Hennessey (1988)	JPSSM	NA	NA	NA	The article serves as a product review for what the author terms to be an AI-infused technology called SellStar, which seems like a precursor to a more modern CRM system.
Mahmoud, Rice, and Malhotra (1988)	JAMS	Adoption (Salesforce Allocation Software)	NA	NA	The authors examine the literature on the adoption of forecasting tools, which are aided by computer technology.
Gatignon and Robertson (1989)	JM	Adoption (General)	NA	125 sales decision-makers	The authors examine the factors that lead to accepting or rejecting technology, which in this instance are laptop computers by the salesforce.
LaForge et al. (1989)	JAMS	Adoption (Salesforce Allocation Software)	NA	NA	The authors discuss adopting salesperson deployment models as useful decision-making tools, which are feasible given advances in personal computing technology. Indeed, the author(s) make a case that personal computers can help with a lot of tasks common to the salesperson.
Moncrief et al. (1989)	JPSSM	Adoption (Telephonic Sales)	NA	NA	The authors define telemarketing, introduce different types of telemarketers, and propose research propositions, which largely deal with the experiences, attitudes, behaviors, etc. of telemarketers compared to field sales reps.
Russ et al. (1989)	JPSSM	Use (General)	NA	69 sales managers	The authors survey several sales managers to elicit their insight what technologies they are currently using in the sales process, how they are using these technologies, and what technologies they see their companies using going forward.
Busbin, Gross, and Dillon (1990)	JPSSM	Adoption (Spreadsheets)	Systems Development Life Cycle	NA	The author(s) make the case that sales managers should use spreadsheets to better control the salesforce and provides a step-by-step process for doing so
Collins and Schibrowsky (1990)	JPSSM	NA	NA	NA	This article reviewed some existing statistical packages, specifically SPSS, with directions on where to purchase the software.
Mitchell (1990)	EJM	Adoption (Computers)	NA	NA	The author proposes a framework for mitigating the risk associated with the purchase of computers by small businesses.
Web 1.0 Era (1991–2004)
Martin and Collins (1991)	JPSSM	Interactive Video Technology (Training)	NA	NA	This article describes interactive video (IV) as a new ST technique used for training.
Moncrief, Lamb, and Mackay (1991)	IMM	Laptop and Portable Computer (Comm.)	NA	216 B2B Sales Managers	Computers are important in performing daily sales activities, and computers help with profits, administrative tasks sales calls, expenses, morale, and productivity. Companies use laptops for (1) file management, (2) communication, (3) improved presentations, and (4) increased productivity.
Swenson and Parrella (1992)	JPSSM	Cellular Phone (Comm.)	NA	10 B2B Salespeople - Qualitative (USA)	The authors present insights into the adoption, implementation, and utilization of cellular telephone technology.
Honeycutt, McCarty, and Howe (1993)	JPSSM	Video Enhanced Sales Training	NA	NA	This article describes the use of video enhanced sales training (VET). VET enables companies to offer training programs to salespeople as itt provides flexibility and the ability for salespeople to complete the training modules at their own pace. Regarding limitations, VET is a one-way communication tool, lacks the benefits of a dynamic learning environment in traditional classroom training.
Hill and Swenson (1994)	JPSSM	Electronic Data Interchange (Comm.)	NA	NA	This article describes the impact of electronic data interchange (EDI) on the sales function. Given that EDI allows for information linkages between selling and buying firms, there are changes in the salesperson-buyer interface.
Anderson (1996)	JPSSM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	NA	Three technological forces (1) SFA (e.g. notebook computers, electronic data interchange, desktop video conferencing), (2) virtual sales offices, and (3) electronic sales channels (e.g. internet, television home shopping, online computer shopping). Salespeople should thus embrace such technological changes and be prepared to keep up to date.
Athaide, Meyers, and Wilemon (2003)	JPIM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	242 B2B Salespeople (USA)	Most relevant to the use of technology is the factor related to "real-time problem-solving assistance," where the authors find that salespeople use two-way communication-based technologies (e.g. email) to solve customer problems as quickly as possible.
Bondra and Davis (1996)	IMM	SFA Adoption (Comm. Tools)	NA	Qualitative	Sales information technology (portable notebook computers) improves cross-functional communications and internal coordination. While implementing SFA is highly beneficial, the authors warn against resistance, lack of training and support, not piloting the system first, and neglecting to keep the original objectives in mind.
Keillor, Bashaw, and Pettijohn (1997)	JBIM	Computer Adoption (Comm.)	NA	126 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	Less experienced (less than five years) salespeople have a significantly more positive attitude toward computer technology, are more receptive to using computers in the sales process, and believe that such technology makes them more productive.
Maltz and Srivastava (1997)	LRP	Electronic Data Interchange (Adoption)	NA	Electronic Address Book	Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) systems consist of (1) identifying sources of value and environmental uncertainty, (2) establishing and comparing measures of potential and realized value, (3) establishing firm-specific measures of implementation and determining firm-specific investments, and (4) implementing enhancements and repeat the process. In terms of value, the authors identify increased sales and reduced costs from increased management options and reduced safety stocks.
Parthasarathy and Sohi (1997)	JBIM	SFA Adoption (Comm. Tools)	Diffusion Theory	NA	Organizational factors that drive organizational adoption include (1) industry concentration, (2) demand uncertainty, (3) intra-industry communication links, (4) inter-industry communication links, (5) organization size, (6) centralization, (7) complexity, and (8) previous company experience. The authors also provide individual factors that shape individual salesperson use of SFA systems, including (1) non-monetary costs, (2) interpersonal links, (3) experience, (4) personal factors, (5) education, and (6) age.
Samli, Wills, and Herbig (1997)	IMM	Internet Use (Comm.)	NA	Conceptual	The authors advance a model that describes the changes occurring in the international sales process due to the potential power of the Internet as a selling, information communications tool.
Agarwal and Prasad (1998)	Decision Support Systems	Information Systems Adoption (Comm.)	Innovation Diffusion Theory	76 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	The relative efficacy of mass media and interpersonal communication channels shapes salespersons’ perceptions of information technology, which impacts the decision to adopt the technology.
Marshall, Moncrief, and Lassk (1999)	IMM	Advanced Technology Use (Comm., Planning, Presenting)	NA	6 Focus Groups (40 Salespeople)	Technological change is a big driver of sales activity change. Such advanced technology includes, among other things, e-mail, the internet, cellular phone, web page, and audio-video conferencing.
Moncrief and Cravens (1999)	MIP	Advanced Technology Use (Comm.)	NA	NA	Technology impacts sales management at the macro and micro levels. At the macro level, technology (e.g. email, internet), has enabled management to better interact with salespeople instantly, reach salespeople more easily, and make better decisions. At the micro level, technology (e.g. laptop, cellular phone, fax), has enabled salespeople to work virtually and connect with their customers from anywhere in the world.
Rivers and Dart (1999)	JPSSM	SFA Adoption	NA	210 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	There is no significant relationship between the extent of SFA acquisition and the benefits gained. Organizations considering the SFA buying decision from a broad perspective realize greater improvements in sales force efficiency.
Erffmeyer and Johnson (2001)	JPSSM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	40 Salespeople - Qualitative	Findings suggest that sales automation was used for some planning and evaluation practices in the sales process. Primarily used to improve communication with the client and access to information. Project costs for adopting SFA were severely underestimated, and the amount of training required.
Morgan and Inks (2001)	IMM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	132 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	A positive significant relationship between SFA Acceptance and a) accurate expectations, b) user influence, c) training. However, no relationship was found between commitment from management and SFA acceptance.
Shoemaker (2001)	JPSSM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	Conceptual	IT has influenced three parts of market relating capability: 1) relationship orientation, 2) integrated and alignment processes, and 3) customer knowledge.
Jones, Sundaram, and Chin (2002)	JPSSM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	Theory of Reasoned Action	164 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	Salesperson attitudes (Perceived usefulness, Attitude toward the new system, compatibility) positively impact intention to use the new SFA.
Ingram, LaForge, and Leigh (2002)	IMM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	Conceptual	Review of the sales literature positioning SFA and ST evolution as one of the three critical areas for future sales success.
Pullig, Maxham, and Hair (2002)	JBR	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	23 B2B Salespeople	SFA implementation climate includes training, encouragement, facilitative leadership, and firm support.
Speier and Venkatesh (2002)	JM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	454 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	Salespeople are positive about SF technology after training. However, 6 months later technology is widely rejected, and salesperson absenteeism and turnover have increased significantly.
Widmier, Jackson, and McCabe (2002)	JPSSM	SFA Adoption (Comm. Tools)	NA	187 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	Salespeople surveyed use technology to varying degrees, from cell phones and fax machines in broad functional areas, including organizing, presenting, reporting, informing, supporting, and processing transactions, and communicating.
Marshall, Goebel, and Moncrief (2003)	JBR	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	215 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	Computer technology is the least important when influencing the hiring of salespeople.
Ahearne, Srinivasan, and Weinstein (2004)	JPSSM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	Technology Acceptance Model	131 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	This study explores the assumption that more technology always leads to better results. The findings indicate a curvilinear relationship between IT usage and job performance.
Ko and Dennis (2004)	JPSSM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	1,340 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	This study finds that SFA use impacts salesperson performance.
Zablah, Bellenger, and Johnston (2004)	JPSSM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	NA	Conceptual	A model identifying the extent of the connection between three components of CRM (employees, processes, and technology).
Zahay, Griffin, and Fredericks (2004)	IMM	Information Management	Resource-based view	20 B2B Salespeople - Qualitative	This research explores the role of managing knowledge and information with new product development. Eight different types of information were identified.
Web 2.0 Era (2005–2023)
Ahearne, Jelinek, and Rapp (2005)	IMM	SFA Adoption (Comm. Tools)	NA	138 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	Results indicate that the use of SFA tools only enhances salesperson efficiency and effectiveness user conditions of adequate user support and training. In fact, under low levels of user training and support, the use of SFA tools was found to reduce salesperson efficiency and effectiveness.
Buehrer, Senecal, and Bolman Pullins (2005)	IMM	CRM and SFA Adoption (Comm. Tools)	NA	130 B2B Salespeople (NA)	Results from this qualitative study show that more productivity/efficiency was the main reason why salespeople use technology, the lack of management and technical support proved to be the main barrier to usage, and training proved most effective in increasing usage of SFA technology.
Rangarajan, Jones, and Chin (2005)	IMM	SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	Technology acceptance model (TAM)	150 B2B Salespeople (USA)	Integrating SFA technology induces adverse role perceptions in salespeople. However, in controlling extraneous variables, the effort is significantly related to technology use.
Robinson et al. (2005)	JBR	SFA Adoption (Comm. and Presentation Tools)	Technology acceptance model (TAM)	118 B2B Salespeople (USA)	Results reveal support for the TAM in a salesforce context, as well as evidence that support services and personal innovativeness impact perceived ease of use of technology by field salespeople.
Robinson et al. (2005)	IMM	SFA Adoption (Comm. and Presentation Tools)	Technology acceptance model (TAM)	218 B2B Salespeople (USA)	Results show that behavioral intentions to use technology positively affect salesperson performance through enhanced propensity to practice adaptive selling.
Schillewaert et al. (2005)	IMM	SFA Adoption (Comm. Tools)	Technology acceptance model (TAM)	229 B2B Salespeople (USA)	Results show that putting ST to use strongly depends on salespeople’s perceptions about the technology enhancing their performance, their personal innovativeness and organizational efforts in terms of user training. Throughout the adoption process companies also need to target sales line managers–next to end users–because salespeople clearly comply with the expectations of their supervisors.
Tanner and Shipp (2005)	IMM	CRM and SFA Use (Comm. Presentation Tools)	NA	NA	This paper examines the impact of ST from four perspectives: the salesperson, the field sales manager, the sales executive, and the customer. Noting that the needs and evaluations of technology vary, depending upon the functional position and viewpoint.
Hunter and Perreault (2006)	JPSSM	CRM and SFA Use (Planning and Comm. Tools)	Social exchange theory	79 B2B Salesperson (USA)	Results indicates that a salesperson’s technology orientation has a direct impact on internal role performance, and it affects performance with customers through a double-mediated mechanism involving the effective use of information and smart selling behaviors (planning and adaptive selling). Sales managers can influence ST orientation by providing better internal technology support, considering technology orientation along with customer’s approval of technology in account assignments, and understanding the probability of negative effects through a salesperson’s experience.
Ahearne, Hughes, and Schillewaert (2007)	IJRM	CRM Adoption (Comm. and Presentation Tools)	Technology performance chain.	376 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	Results show that, despite uncertain results and the frequent resistance among salespeople to IT interventions, IT acceptance indeed has a positive effect on sales performance. This occurs because salespeople using IT expand their knowledge and, in turn, gain improved targeting abilities, enhanced presentation skills and increased call productivity.
Bush et al. (2007)	JBR	CRM and SFA Adoption (Comm. and Presentation Tools)	Grounded theory	33 B2B and B2C sales executives	Results show that there are many ethical issues surrounding the use of ST. These ethical issues comprise two major themes: Exploitation (including Deception, Inappropriateness, Spying, Manipulation and Poaching) and Control (Surveillance, Accountability, Loss of empowerment).
Hunter and Perreault (2007)	JM	CRM and SFA Use (Comm. Tools)	Relationship-forging theory	154 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	Results show that 1) relationship-forging tasks predict 57% of the variance in a salesperson’s relationship-building performance with customers; 2) using ST either to analyze or to communicate information has mediated positive effects on a salesperson’s relationship-building performance with customers. 3) However, a salesperson’s use of ST to analyze information negatively influences administrative performance.
Mathieu, Ahearne, and Taylor (2007)	JAP	New ST Tools Use (Comm. and Planning Tools	NA	592 B2B salespeople (USA)	Results show that 1) the salespersons’ work experience hurts their technological self-efficacy, which in turn relates positively to their use of technology. 2) Sales performance is positively related to both past performance and the use of new technology tools. 3) leaders’ commitment to ST enhances salespersons’ technology self-efficacy and usage, and leaders’ empowering behaviors influences salespersons’ technology self-efficacy and moderate individual-level relationships.
Ahearne et al. (2008)	Management Science	CRM and SFA Adoption (Comm., Planning and Presentation Tools)	Task-technology-fit (TTF)	254 B2B Sales Reps (USA)	Results in a pharmaceutical sales setting indicate that IT use can improve customer service and salesperson’s adaptability, leading to improved sales performance.
Rapp, Agnihotri, and Forbes (2008)	JPSSM	CRM and SFA Use (Comm. and Presentation Tools)	Task-technology Fit Theory	662 B2B Sales Reps, 60 Sales Managers (NA)	Results indicate that SFA usage has a direct impact on effort, thereby reducing several hours worked, and CRM usage has a direct positive impact on adaptive selling behaviors. Moreover, experience moderates the relationship between CRM usage and adaptive selling.
Ahearne and Rapp (2010)	JPSSM	CRM and SFA Adoption (Comm. Tools)	Technology acceptance model (TAM)	NA	In B2C sales interactions, technology takes on a varying role and often enables a salesperson to complete a sale successfully but seldom replaces the human interaction necessary to further develop the relationship.
Cascio, John Mariadoss, and Mouri (2010)	IMM	SFA Adoption (Comm. Tools)	Technology acceptance model (TAM)	292 B2B Salespeople (USA)	Even when supervisors are committed to ST, lack of top management commitment can hurt SFA adoption.
Homburg, Wieseke, and Kuehnl (2010)	JAMS	SFA Adoption (Comm. Tools)	Informational and normative social influence theory	22 B2B Regional Managers; 416 Sales Managers; 1040 Salespeople (USA)	Results demonstrate that coworkers’ and superiors’ SFA adoption has a positive effect on subordinates’ SFA adoption which goes beyond the commonly tested determinants. Also, results reveal differences among predictors of the Technology Acceptance Model (within-level effects) examined at three hierarchical levels.
Onyemah, Swain, and Hanna (2010)	JPSSM	ST Use (Comm. Tools)	Social learning	81 B2C Consumers (Nigeria)	This study confirms that the usage of ST has a positive influence on salesperson performance.
Agnihotri et al. (2012)	JPSSM	Social Media Use	Task-technology fit	NA	The study defines salespersons’ social media use. It proposes a theoretical framework to explain the mechanisms (salesperson service behaviors) through which salespeople use social media creates value to achieve competitive goals.
Ahearne et al. (2012)	JPSSM	CRM Adoption (Planning and Presentation Tools)	Contingency theory	NA	The authors suggest that CRM strategies can be implemented from the top-down, originating from top management decisions, or from the bottom-up, stemming from the knowledge and experience of the frontline salespeople.
Levin, Hansen, and Laverie (2012)	JPSSM	Social Media Use (Blog)	NA	194 Business students (USA)	Sales managers need to recognize that they must consider sales reps’ degree of apathetic motivation along with their degrees of extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation toward using social media.
Marshall, Moncrief, Lassk, et al. (2012)	JPSSM	Social Media Use	NA	35 B2B Sales Professionals (USA and UK)	Results reveals six major themes: connectivity, relationships, selling tools, generational, global, and sales/ marketing interface.
Rapp et al. (2012)	JBR	CRM and SFA Use (Comm. Planning Tools)	NA	350 B2B Salespeople (Belgium)	Results suggest that this structure, coupled with eLearning and technological tools, leads to even greater positive outcomes for an outside salesforce.
Rodriguez et. al. (2012)	JPSSM	Social Media Use	Social capital theory	1699 B2B Salespeople (40 different countries)	Findings support that social media has a positive with sales processes (creating opportunities and relationship management) and relationship sales performance.
Rapp et al. (2013)	JAMS	Social Media Use	Contagion theory	106 B2B and B2C Salespeople; 107 Retail store managers 97 Consumers (NA)	offer new insights into the contagion effects of social media usage across the distribution channel and important social influence mechanisms that enhance these effects. Social media use positively contributes to brand performance, retailer performance, and consumer–retailer loyalty. Also, the effect of supplier social media usage on retailer social media usage and, in turn, on customer social media usage is moderated by brand reputation and service ambidexterity.
Limbu, Jayachandran, and Babin (2014)	IMM	ICT Use (Comm. Planning Tools)	Social exchange theory Balance theory	372 B2B Sales Reps (India)	ICT indirectly influences job satisfaction through salesforce administrative performance. While ICT infrastructure, training, and support positively relate to administrative performance, none of them influence outcome performance significantly.
Rollins, Rutherford, and Nickell (2014)	IMM	Social Media Use (Blogs)	Social learning theory	200 B2B Salespeople’s Blogs (NA)	A theoretical foundation for future work on social learning theory and online learning in marketing, sales, and business education.
Hunter and Panagopoulos (2015)	IMM	CRM Use (Comm. Tools)	Commitment theory	303 B2B Salespeople (NA)	The three commitment components (i.e. affective, normative, and continuance) are distinct. Specifically, affective commitment does not exert a significant positive influence on CRM use as expected, yet normative commitment does. In contrast, while lower levels of continuance commitment reduce infusion, higher levels have positive effects, thus depicting a U-shaped effect. Finally, ST infusion influences both key outcomes.
Agnihotri et al. (2016)	IMM	Social Media Use	Information communication literature	111 B2B Salespeople (USA)	Developed a measure of salesperson social media use. A salesperson’s use of social media is found to impact information communication behaviors, which enhance salesperson responsiveness and customer satisfaction. Also, salesperson responsiveness is found to have a positive relationship with customer satisfaction.
Guesalaga (2016)	IMM	Social Media Use	Interactional Psychology theory	220 B2B Sales Executives (USA)	Organizational competence and commitment to social media are key determinants of social media usage in sales. Customer engagement with social media also predicts social media usage in sales.
Hansen and Levin (2016)	JBR	Social Media Use (Facebook)	Self Determination Theory	210 Business Individuals (USA)	The customer-facing nature of some jobs impacts the intention to use social media technologies.
Lacoste (2016)	IMM	Social Media Use	Grounded theory	22 B2B Key Account Manager (France)	A model of key account managers’ use of social media derived from our empirical data and relate it to a key customer engagement model.
Quinton and Wilson (2016)	IMM	Social Media Use (LinkedIn)	Social networks and exchange theory	554 B2B LinkedIn interactions and 12 Interviews (Australia, Asia, Europe, USA)	The model created justifies the relevancy of social media network participation for developing business relationships and demonstrates how participation in these networks can lead to enhanced business performance.
Agnihotri et al. (2017)	JBR	Social Media CRM Adoption	Task-Technology Fit	162 B2B Salesperson-Customer dyads (India)	Sales-based CRM technology has a positive influence on salesperson service behaviors, and salespeople using CRM technology in conjunction with social media are more likely to exhibit higher levels of service behaviors than their counterparts with low social media technology use.
Itani, Agnihotri, and Dingus (2017)	IMM	Social Media Use	Adaptive selling theory	120 B2B Salesperson-Sales Manager dyads (India)	A salesperson’s attitude toward social media usefulness, as well as a salesperson’s learning orientation, will influence how much a salesperson uses social media to assist in day-to-day job tasks. The impact that the use of social media has on collecting knowledge about competitors, adapting to customers and sales performance is considered.
Nunan et al. (2018)	IMM	Social Media Use	Engagement marketing theory	NA	This paper critically appraises Agnihotri et al. (2016) work and positions it within the emerging literature on social media communication in the sales process. The authors conclude with identifying a diverse set of new directions for investigating social media within the sales process.
Ogilvie et al. (2018)	IMM	Social Media Technology (SMT) Adoption	NA	375 B2B Salespeople (USA)	Demonstrated the effects of SMT on salesperson product information communication, diligence, product knowledge, and adaptability. Moderating effects suggest that the integration of SMT in the absence of training on the technology may not yield the best results.
Inyang (2019)	MMJ	Social Media Use	Task-Technology Fit	162 B2B Salespeople (USA)	When salespeople use social media to implement the sales strategy dimensions of customer segmentation, customer prioritization, and the use of selling models, it has a positive effect on their sales performance.
Agnihotri (2020)	IMM	Social Media Use	Customer engagement theory	NA	Suggestions for future research examining the links between social media use and customer engagement within the B2B sales domain. Several research questions are presented under the four broad topics, namely the utility of social media technologies, context matters, social media pitfalls, and futuristic social media applications.
Bill, Feurer, and Klarmann (2020)	JAMS	Social Media Use	Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology	331 B2B sales managers and salespeople (Germany)	Social media’s effect on customer loyalty depends strongly on the context. Salesperson social media use increases customer loyalty only for high-status customers and customers with small buying centers.
Guenzi and Nijssen (2020)	IMM	Social Media Adoption and Use (Online Comm. Tools)	Motivation-opportunity-ability (MOA) theory	345 B2B and B2C Salespeople (Europe)	Market readiness, peer influence, and organizational support positively affect salesperson motivation and the individual’s ability to integrate social media into a sales job. Motivation and ability drive social media use in sales, but a lack of ability shuts down the positive influence of motivation on social media use. Finally, a positive effect of social media use on sales performance is detected,
Itani et al. (2020)	IMM	CRM Use (Social Media Comm. Tools)	Social exchange theory	162 B2B Salesperson-Buyer dyads (India)	Social media use and CRM tech positively influence buyer-seller information exchanges and take a distinct route to enable the information exchange between the buyer and the seller. The results also suggest that managers must champion using both technology applications in their salesforce.
Bowen et al. (2021)	IMM	Social Media Use	Task-Technology Fit	171 B2B Industrial Salespeople (Germany)	A salesperson’s social media usage relates positively with proactive servicing and value-oriented prospecting. Peer social media usage has positive moderating effects on the B2B salesperson’s social media usage and value-oriented prospecting/proactive servicing relationships.
Conde, Prybutok, and Sumlin (2021)	JBIM	Social Media Use (LinkedIn)	Situated learning theory	192 B2B Blog Posts and 2,035 comments. (NA)	Inside sales agents seek information through social media outside their company, within their mesosystem, to gain knowledge to improve sales activities.
Itani et al. (2021)	IMM	Social Media Use	Construal level theory	158 B2B Salespeople (USA)	The moderating effect of a salesperson’s moral identity on the relationship between the salesperson’s social media use and salesperson inclusion-of-customer-in-the-self is stronger for females than males.
Rayburn et al. (2021)	JBR	CRM Adoption and Use (Comm. Planning Tools)	Job demands-resources theory	134 B2B Salespeople (USA Canada)	Results show that continuous techno-training can help in developing techno-efficacy directly as well as indirectly through fostering techno-expectancy and suppressing technostress.
Schmitt, Casenave, and Pallud (2021)	IMM	Social Media Use	Institutional theory	32 B2B Salespeople (France)	Insights into how organizations can develop salespeople’s depth of social media usage and encourage firms to support salespeople’s social selling initiatives instead of controlling them.
Agnihotri, Kalra, et al. (2022)	Decision Sciences	Social Media Use (Online Social Networks)	Social capital theory	B2B sales and service employees, managers, and customers (India)	The use of OSNs relates to social capital development and maintenance. Time management skills strengthen links between OSNs and both forms of social capital. However, perceived innovation climate plays a moderating role only in the social capital development process.
Agnihotri, Kalra, et al. (2022)	JBL	Social Media Use	Knowledge-based view	199 B2B Customers and Account Managers (NA)	Supplier account managers’ social media use can increase product and competitor knowledge, positively influencing customer outcomes. When customer demandingness is high, the relationship between social media use and knowledge will be stronger.
Chaker et al. (2022)	IMM	Social Media Use	Grounded theory	33 B2B Sales Professionals (USA)	A framework depicting: inside sales strategic social media use may influence inside salesperson-customer digital engagement. Firm digital technology resources serve as enablement factors that shape the effects of the social media strategies that inside salespeople use.
Cheng et al. (2023)	EJM	Social Media Use (Twitter)	NA	28 B2B Salespeople (North America)	to structure the training of B2B salespeople to fully use social media by aligning specific strategies with different parts of the sales process
Itani, Badrinarayanan and Rangarajan (2022)	EJM	Social Media Use	Social capital theory	B2B 158 salespeople (USA)	Salespeople’s social media use enhances their social capital with support for direct effects on market knowledge and reputation and indirect effect on networking.
Itani, Kalra, and Riley (2022)	Information Management	CRM Use (social media Planning Tools)	Task-Technology Fit	158 B2B Salespeople (USA)	Social media, CRM technology, and their interaction support salespeople in their value co-creation efforts through the mediating role of knowledge enriched by these tools.
Terho, Salonen, and Yrjänen (2023)	IMM	Social Media Use	Theory of planned behavior	199 B2B Salespeople (Italy)	Three social selling dimensions of insight generation, connecting, and engagement. Management plays a central role in boosting social selling among the sales force through social media strategy, social media sales tools, and firm content support. In turn, ST orientation and social influence represent the key individual-level drivers.

Table

Technology	Benefit	Illustrative Studies
Fax machine	One-way communication with greater speed and accuracy Allowed salespeople to work virtually and connect with customers	Erffmeyer and Johnson 2001; Moncrief and Cravens 1999
Cellular phone	Instant two-way communication with customers and the firm Allows salespeople to work virtually and connect with customers	Erffmeyer and Johnson 2001; Marshall, Moncrief, and Lassk 1999
Laptop	Allows salespeople to work virtually and connect with customers	Athaide, Meyers, and Wilemon 2003; Bondra and Davis 1996; Erffmeyer and Johnson 2001; Keillor, Bashaw, and Pettijohn 1997; Moncrief and Cravens 1999
Video Training	Training programs that are flexible; consistent message; reduce training costs and training time	Honeycutt, McCarty, and Howe 1993; Marshall, Moncrief, and Lassk 1999; Martin and Collins 1991
Internet usage	Information communications tool Allows salespeople to work virtually and connect with customers	Erffmeyer and Johnson 2001; Samli, Wills, and Herbig 1997
Electronic Data Interchange	EDI helps with sales by providing more time for non-order taking functions The ability to call on more customers. Lower error rates Better access to diagnostic reports Quicker order response, and better accuracy	Erffmeyer and Johnson 2001; Hill and Swenson 1994; Maltz and Srivastava 1997

Parasuraman, A., and Ralph L. Day. 1977. “A Management-Oriented Model for Allocating Sales Effort.” Journal of Marketing Research 14 (1): 22–33. doi: 10.2307/3151051.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mahmoud, Essam, Gillian Rice, and Naresh Malhotra. 1988. “Emerging Issues in Sales Forecasting and Decision Support Systems.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 16 (3–4): 47–61. doi: 10.1007/BF02723360.

 Google Scholar

Zoltners, Andris A., and Prabhakant Sinha. 1980. “Integer Programming Models for Sales Resource Allocation.” Management Science 26 (3): 242–60. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.26.3.242.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rivers, L. Mark, and Jack Dart. 1999. “Sales Technology Applications: The Acquisition and Use of Sales Force Automation by Mid-Sized Manufacturers.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 19 (2): 59–73. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1999.10754172.

 Google Scholar

Buttle, Francis, Lawrence Ang, and Reiny Iriana. 2006. “Sales Force Automation: Review, Critique, Research Agenda.” International Journal of Management Reviews 8 (4): 213–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2006.00128.x.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Morgan, Amy J., and Scott A. Inks. 2001. “Technology and the Sales Force.” Industrial Marketing Management 30 (5): 463–72. doi: 10.1016/s0019-8501(99)00115-7.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Parthasarathy, Madhavan, and Ravipreet S. Sohi. 1997. “Salesforce Automation and the Adoption of Technological Innovations by Salespeople: Theory and Implications.” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 12 (3/4): 196–208. doi: 10.1108/08858629710188036.

 Google Scholar

Hunter, Gary K., and William D. Perreault. 2007. “Making Sales Technology Effective.” Journal of Marketing 71 (1): 16–34. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.71.1.16.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Itani, Omar S., Michael T. Krush, Raj Agnihotri, and Kevin J. Trainor. 2020. “Social Media and Customer Relationship Management Technologies: Influencing Buyer-Seller Information Exchanges.” Industrial Marketing Management 90: 264–75. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.07.015.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rapp, Adam, Raj Agnihotri, and Lukas P. Forbes. 2008. “The Sales Force Technology–Performance Chain: The Role of Adaptive Selling and Effort.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 28 (4): 335–50. doi: 10.2753/PSS0885-3134280401.

 Google Scholar

Tanner, Jr., John F., Michael Ahearne, Thomas W. Leigh, Charlotte H. Mason, and William C. Moncrief. 2005. “CRM in Sales-Intensive Organizations: A Review and Future Directions.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 25 (2): 169–80. doi: 10.1080/08853134.2005.10749057.

 Google Scholar

Ahearne, Michael, Douglas E. Hughes, and Niels Schillewaert. 2007. “Why Sales Reps Should Welcome Information Technology: Measuring the Impact of CRM-Based It on Sales Effectiveness.” International Journal of Research in Marketing 24 (4): 336–49. doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2007.09.003.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ahearne, Michael, Eli Jones, Adam Rapp, and John Mathieu. 2008. “High Touch through High Tech: The Impact of Salesperson Technology Usage on Sales Performance via Mediating Mechanisms.” Management Science 54 (4): 671–85. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0783.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sundaram, Suresh, Andrew Schwarz, Eli Jones, and Wynne W. Chin. 2007. “Technology Use on the Front Line: How Information Technology Enhances Individual Performance.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 35 (1): 101–12. doi: 10.1007/s11747-006-0010-4.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Agnihotri, Raj, Prabakar Kothandaraman, Rajiv Kashyap, and Ramendra Singh. 2012. “Bringing ‘Social’ into Sales: The Impact of Salespeople’s Social Media Use on Service Behaviors and Value Creation.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 32 (3): 333–48. doi: 10.2753/PSS0885-3134320304.

 Google Scholar

Andzulis, James “Mick”, Nikolaos G. Panagopoulos, and Adam Rapp. 2012. “A Review of Social Media and Implications for the Sales Process.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 32 (3): 305–16. doi: 10.2753/PSS0885-3134320302.

 Google Scholar

Chaker, Nawar N., Edward L. Nowlin, Maxwell T. Pivonka, Omar S. Itani, and Raj Agnihotri. 2022. “Inside Sales Social Media Use and Its Strategic Implications for Salesperson-Customer Digital Engagement and Performance.” Industrial Marketing Management 100: 127–44. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.10.006.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Schendzielarz, Dennis, Sascha Alavi, and Jan Helge Guba. 2022. “The Impact of Salespeople’s Social Media Adoption on Customer Acquisition Performance – a Contextual Perspective.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 42 (2): 139–57. doi: 10.1080/08853134.2022.2033624.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Trainor, Kevin J., James (Mick) Andzulis, Adam Rapp, and Raj Agnihotri. 2014. “Social Media Technology Usage and Customer Relationship Performance: A Capabilities-Based Examination of Social CRM.” Journal of Business Research 67 (6): 1201–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.05.002.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Agnihotri, Raj, Kevin J. Trainor, Omar S. Itani, and Michael Rodriguez. 2017. “Examining the Role of Sales-Based CRM Technology and Social Media Use on Post-Sale Service Behaviors in India.” Journal of Business Research 81: 144–54. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.08.021.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rapp, Adam, and Nikolaos G. Panagopoulos. 2012. “Perspectives on Personal Selling and Social Media: Introduction to the Special Issue.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 32 (3): 301–4. doi: 10.2753/PSS0885-3134320301.

 Google Scholar

Collins, Robert H. 1984a. “Artificial Intelligence in Personal Selling.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 4 (1): 58–66. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1984.10754372.

 Google Scholar

Syam, Niladri, and Arun Sharma. 2018. “Waiting for a Sales Renaissance in the Fourth Industrial Revolution: Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence in Sales Research and Practice.” Industrial Marketing Management 69: 135–46. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.12.019.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Singh, Jagdip, Karen Flaherty, Ravipreet S. Sohi, Dawn Deeter-Schmelz, Johannes Habel, Kenneth Le Meunier-FitzHugh, Avinash Malshe, Ryan Mullins, and Vincent Onyemah. 2019. “Sales Profession and Professionals in the Age of Digitization and Artificial Intelligence Technologies: Concepts, Priorities, and Questions.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 39 (1): 2–22. doi: 10.1080/08853134.2018.1557525.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mullins, Ryan, and Raj Agnihotri. 2022. “Digital Selling: Organizational and Managerial Influences for Frontline Readiness and Effectiveness.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 50 (4): 800–21. doi: 10.1007/s11747-021-00836-5.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Badrinarayanan, Vishag, Sreedhar Madhavaram, and K. T. Manis. 2022. “Technology-Enabled Sales Capability: A Capabilities-Based Contingency Framework.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 42 (4): 358–76. doi: 10.1080/08853134.2022.2108823.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Fischer, Heiko, Sven Seidenstricker, and Jens Poeppelbuss. 2023. “The Triggers and Consequences of Digital Sales: A Systematic Literature Review.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 43 (1): 5–23. doi: 10.1080/08853134.2022.2102029.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Marshall, Greg W., William C. Moncrief, and Felicia G. Lassk. 1999. “The Current State of Sales Force Activities.” Industrial Marketing Management 28 (1): 87–98. doi: 10.1016/s0019-8501(98)00025-x.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rangarajan, Deva, Arun Sharma, Teidorlang Lyngdoh, and Bert Paesbrugghe. 2021. “Business-to-business selling in the post-COVID-19 era: Developing an adaptive sales force.” Business Horizons 64 (5): 647–658.

 Google Scholar

Swenson, Michael J., and Adilson Parrella. 1992. “Cellular Telephones and the National Sales Force.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 12 (4): 67–74. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1992.10753929.

 Google Scholar

Athaide, Gerard A., Patricia W. Meyers, and David L. Wilemon. 2003. “Seller-Buyer Interactions during the Commercialization of Technological Process Innovations.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 13 (5): 406–21. doi: 10.1111/1540-5885.1350406.

 Google Scholar

Moncrief, William C., and David W. Cravens. 1999. “Technology and the Changing Marketing World.” Marketing Intelligence & Planning 17 (7): 329–32. doi: 10.1108/02634509910301142.

 Google Scholar

Anderson, Rolph E. 1996. “Personal Selling and Sales Management in the New Millennium.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 16 (4): 17–32. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1996.10754071.

 Google Scholar

Hughes, G. D. 1983. “Computerized Sales Management.” Harvard Business Review 61 (2): 102–12.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Moncrief, William C., Charles W. Lamb, and Jane M. Mackay. 1991. “Laptop Computers in Industrial Sales.” Industrial Marketing Management 20 (4): 279–85. doi: 10.1016/0019-8501(91)90002-w.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Buehrer, Richard E., Sylvain Senecal, and Ellen Bolman Pullins. 2005. “Sales Force Technology Usage—Reasons, Barriers, and Support: An Exploratory Investigation.” Industrial Marketing Management 34 (4): 389–98. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.09.017.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Tanner, John F., and Shannon Shipp. 2005. “Sales Technology within the Salesperson’s Relationships: A Research Agenda.” Industrial Marketing Management 34 (4): 305–12. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.09.011.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zablah, Alex R., Danny N. Bellenger, and Wesley J. Johnston. 2004. “An Evaluation of Divergent Perspectives on Customer Relationship Management: Towards a Common Understanding of an Emerging Phenomenon.” Industrial Marketing Management 33 (6): 475–89. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.01.006.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hill, Ned C., and Michael J. Swenson. 1994. “Sales Technology Applications: The Impact of Electronic Data Interchange on the Sales Function.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 14 (3): 79–87. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1994.10753995.

 Google Scholar

Maltz, Elliot, and Rajendra K. Srivastava. 1997. “Managing Retailer-Supplier Partnerships with EDI: Evaluation and Implementation.” Long Range Planning 30 (6): 862–76. doi: 10.1016/s0024-6301(97)00072-1.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Erffmeyer, Robert C., and Dale A. Johnson. 2001. “An Exploratory Study of Sales Force Automation Practices: Expectations and Realities.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 21 (2): 167–75. doi: 10.1080/08853134.2001.10754267.

 Google Scholar

Agnihotri, Raj, Rebecca Dingus, Michael Y. Hu, and Michael T. Krush. 2016. “Social Media: Influencing Customer Satisfaction in B2B Sales.” Industrial Marketing Management 53: 172–80. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.09.003.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Agnihotri, Raj, Sudha Mani, Nawar N. Chaker, Patricia J. Daugherty, and Prabakar Kothandaraman. 2022. “Drivers and Performance Implications of Frontline Employees’ Social Capital Development and Maintenance: The Role of Online Social Networks*.” Decision Sciences 53 (1): 181–215. doi: 10.1111/deci.12489.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ogilvie, Jessica, Raj Agnihotri, Adam Rapp, and Kevin Trainor. 2018. “Social Media Technology Use and Salesperson Performance: A Two Study Examination of the Role of Salesperson Behaviors, Characteristics, and Training.” Industrial Marketing Management 75: 55–65. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.03.007.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Honeycutt, Jr, Earl D., Tom McCarty, and Vince Howe. 1993. “Sales Technology Applications: Self-Paced Video Enhanced Training: A Case Study.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 13 (1): 73–9. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1993.10753938.

 Google Scholar

Venkatesh, Venkatesh, Michael G. Morris, Gordon B. Davis, and Fred D. Davis. 2003. “User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View.” MIS Quarterly 27 (3): 425–78. doi: 10.2307/30036540.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lodish, Leonard M. 1971. “Callplan: An Interactive Salesman’s Call Planning System.” Management Science 18 (4-part-ii): P-25–P–40. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.18.4.P25.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Montgomery, David B., Alvin J. Silk, and Carlos E. Zaragoza. 1971. “A Multiple-Product Sales Force Allocation Model.” Management Science 18 (4-part-ii): P-3–P-24. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.18.4.P3.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lodish, Leonard M. 1975. “Sales Territory Alignment to Maximize Profit.” Journal of Marketing Research 12 (1): 30–6. doi: 10.2307/3150655.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Armstrong, Gary M. 1976. “The Schedule Model and the Salesman’s Effort Allocation.” California Management Review 18 (4): 43–51. doi: 10.2307/41164667.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lodish, Leonard M. 1980. “A User-Oriented Model for Sales Force Size, Product, and Market Allocation Decisions.” Journal of Marketing 44 (3): 70–8. doi: 10.2307/1251113.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Collins, Robert H. 1984b. “JPSSM Introduces New Section.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 4 (1): 56–67. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1984.10754371.

 Google Scholar

Collins, Robert H. 1984c. “Portable Computers: Applications to Increase Salesforce Productivity.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 4 (2): 75–9. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1984.10754384.

 Google Scholar

Caywood, Clarke L., and Connie L. Bauer. 1986. “An Electronic Bulletin Board System for the Sales Profession—a Review and Proposal.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 6 (3): 85–90. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1986.10754440.

 Google Scholar

Moncrief, William C., Charles W. Lamb, Jr., and Terry Dielman. 1986. “Developing Telemarketing Support Systems.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 6 (2): 43–9. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1986.10754425.

 Google Scholar

Clopton, Stephen W., and Hiram C. Barksdale. 1987. “Microcomputer Based Methods for Dyadic Interaction Research in Marketing.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 15 (2): 63–8. doi: 10.1007/BF02723404.

 Google Scholar

Collins, Robert H., and Rebecca J. Mauritson. 1987. “Microcomputer Applications: Artificial Intelligence in Sales Forecasting Applications.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 7 (1): 77–80. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1987.10754451.

 Google Scholar

Collins, Robert H., Regan F. Carey, and Rebecca J. Mauritson. 1987. “Microcomputer Applications: Maps on a Micro: Applications in Sales and Marketing Management.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 7 (3): 83–8. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1987.10754473.

 Google Scholar

Dalrymple, Douglas J. 1987. “Sales Forecasting Practices.” International Journal of Forecasting 3 (3–4): 379–91. doi: 10.1016/0169-2070(87)90031-8.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Goslar, Martin D. 1987. “Marketing and the Adoption of Microcomputers: An Application of Diffusion Theory.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 15 (2): 42–8. doi: 10.1007/BF02723401.

 Google Scholar

Johnson, Eugene M., and William J. Meiners. 1987. “Selling & Sales Management in Action: Telemarketing: Trends, Issues, and Opportunities.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 7 (3): 65–8. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1987.10754470.

 Google Scholar

Mentzer, John T., Camille P. Schuster, and David J. Roberts. 1987. “Microcomputer versus Mainframe Usage by Marketing Professionals.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 15 (2): 1–9. doi: 10.1007/BF02723396.

 Google Scholar

Steinberg, Margery, and Richard E. Plank. 1987. “Expert Systems: The Integrative Sales Management Tool of the Future.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 15 (2): 55–62. doi: 10.1007/BF02723403.

 Google Scholar

Wedell, Al, and Dale Hempeck. 1987. “Sales Force Automation—Here and Now.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 7 (2): 11–6. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1987.10754455.

 Google Scholar

Beltramini, Richard F. 1988. “High Technology Salespeople’s Information Acquisition Strategies.” Ournal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 8 (1): 37–44. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1988.10754479.

 Google Scholar

Hennessey, Hubert D. 1988. “Microcomputer Applications: Accelerating the Salesperson Learning Curve.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 8 (3): 77–82. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1988.10754506.

 Google Scholar

Gatignon, Hubert, and Thomas S. Robertson. 1989. “Technology Diffusion: An Empirical Test of Competitive Effects.” Journal of Marketing 53 (1): 35–49. doi: 10.2307/1251523.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

LaForge, Raymond W., Charles W. Lamb, David W. Cravens, and William C. Moncrief. 1989. “Improving Judgment-Based Salesforce Decision Model Applications.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 17 (2): 167–77. doi: 10.1007/BF02723375.

 Google Scholar

Moncrief, William C., Shannon H. Shipp, Charles W. Lamb, Jr., and David W. Cravens. 1989. “Examining the Roles of Telemarketing in Selling Strategy.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 9 (3): 1–12. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1989.10754531.

 Google Scholar

Russ, K. Randall, Joseph F. Hair, Robert C. Erffmeyer, and Debbie Easterling. 1989. “Usage and Perceived Effectiveness of High-Tech Approaches to Sales Training.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 9 (1): 46–54. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1989.10754513.

 Google Scholar

Busbin, James W., Ernst P. Gross, and Thomas Dillon. 1990. “Improving Spreadsheet Control for Sales Managers through the Use of the Systems Development Life Cycle.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 10 (3): 101–7. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1990.10753842.

 Google Scholar

Collins, Robert H., and John A. Schibrowsky. 1990. “Microcomputer Applications: ‘Statistics: For the Rest of Us.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 10 (2): 83–6. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1990.10753828.

 Google Scholar

Mitchell, Graham R. 1990. “Alternative Frameworks for Technology Strategy.” European Journal of Operational Research 47 (2): 153–61. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(90)90274-f.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Martin, Warren S., and Ben H. Collins. 1991. “Sales Technology Applications: Interactive Video Technology in Sales Training: A Case Study.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 11 (3): 61–6. doi: 10.1080/08853134.1991.10753880.

 Google Scholar

Bondra, James C., and Tim R. V. Davis. 1996. “Marketing’s Role in Cross-Functional Information Management.” Industrial Marketing Management 25 (3): 187–95. doi: 10.1016/0019-8501(95)00076-3.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Keillor, Bruce D., R. Edward Bashaw, and Charles E. Pettijohn. 1997. “Salesforce Automation Issues Prior to Implementation: The Relationship between Attitudes toward Technology, Experience and Productivity.” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 12 (3/4): 209–19. doi: 10.1108/08858629710188045.

 Google Scholar

Samli, A. Coskun, James R. Wills, and Paul Herbig. 1997. “The Information Superhighway Goes International: Implications for Industrial Sales Transactions.” Industrial Marketing Management 26 (1): 51–8. doi: 10.1016/s0019-8501(96)00031-4.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Agarwal, Ritu, and Jayesh Prasad. 1998. “The Antecedents and Consequents of User Perceptions in Information Technology Adoption.” Decision Support Systems 22 (1): 15–29. doi: 10.1016/s0167-9236(97)00006-7.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Shoemaker, Mary E. 2001. “A Framework for Examining IT-Enabled Market Relationships.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 21 (2): 177–85. doi: 10.1080/08853134.2001.10754268.

 Google Scholar

Jones, Eli, Suresh Sundaram, and Wynne Chin. 2002. “Factors Leading to Sales Force Automation Use: A Longitudinal Analysis.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 22 (3): 145–56. doi: 10.1080/08853134.2002.10754303.

 Google Scholar

Ingram, Thomas N., Raymond W. LaForge, and Thomas W. Leigh. 2002. “Selling in the New Millennium.” Industrial Marketing Management 31 (7): 559–67. doi: 10.1016/s0019-8501(02)00175-x.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pullig, Chris, James G. Maxham, and Joseph F. Hair. 2002. “Salesforce Automation Systems: An Exploratory Examination of Organizational Factors Associated with Effective Implementation and Salesforce Productivity.” Journal of Business Research 55 (5): 401–15. doi: 10.1016/s0148-2963(00)00159-4.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Speier, Cheri, and Viswanath Venkatesh. 2002. “The Hidden Minefields in the Adoption of Sales Force Automation Technologies.” Journal of Marketing 66 (3): 98–111. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.66.3.98.18510.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Widmier, Scott M., Donald W. Jackson, Jr., and Deborah Brown McCabe. 2002. “Infusing Technology into Personal Selling.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 22 (3): 189–98. doi: 10.1080/08853134.2002.10754306.

 Google Scholar

Marshall, Greg W., Daniel J. Goebel, and William C. Moncrief. 2003. “Hiring for Success at the Buyer–Seller Interface.” Journal of Business Research 56 (4): 247–55. doi: 10.1016/s0148-2963(02)00435-6.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ahearne, Michael, Narasimhan Srinivasan, and Luke Weinstein. 2004. “Effect of Technology on Sales Performance: Progressing from Technology Acceptance to Technology Usage and Consequence.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 24 (4): 297–310.

 Google Scholar

Ko, Dong-Gil, and Alan R. Dennis. 2004. “Sales Force Automation and Sales Performance: Do Experience and Expertise Matter?” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 24 (4): 311–22. doi: 10.1080/08853134.2004.10749040.

 Google Scholar

Zahay, Debra, Abbie Griffin, and Elisa Fredericks. 2004. “Sources, Uses, and Forms of Data in the New Product Development Process.” Industrial Marketing Management 33 (7): 657–66. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2003.10.002.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ahearne, Michael, Ronald Jelinek, and Adam Rapp. 2005. “Moving beyond the Direct Effect of SFA Adoption on Salesperson Performance: Training and Support as Key Moderating Factors.” Industrial Marketing Management 34 (4): 379–88. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.09.020.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rangarajan, Deva, Eli Jones, and Wynne Chin. 2005. “Impact of Sales Force Automation on Technology-Related Stress, Effort, and Technology Usage among Salespeople.” Industrial Marketing Management 34 (4): 345–54. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.09.015.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Robinson, Leroy, Marshall Greg W.Jr., and Miriam B. Stamps. 2005. “An Empirical Investigation of Technology Acceptance in a Field Sales Force Setting.” Industrial Marketing Management 34 (4): 407–15. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.09.019.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Schillewaert, Niels, Michael J. Ahearne, Ruud T. Frambach, and Rudy K. Moenaert. 2005. “The Adoption of Information Technology in the Sales Force.” Industrial Marketing Management 34 (4): 323–36. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.09.013.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hunter, Gary K., and William D. Perreault. 2006. “Sales Technology Orientation, Information Effectiveness, and Sales Performance.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 26 (2): 95–113. doi: 10.2753/PSS0885-3134260201.

 Google Scholar

Bush, Alan J., Victoria D. Bush, Linda M. Orr, and Richard A. Rocco. 2007. “Sales Technology: Help or Hindrance to Ethical Behaviors and Productivity?” Journal of Business Research 60 (11): 1198–205. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.04.007.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mathieu, John, Michael Ahearne, and Scott R. Taylor. 2007. “A Longitudinal Cross-Level Model of Leader and Salesperson Influences on Sales Force Technology Use and Performance.” The Journal of Applied Psychology 92 (2): 528–37. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.528.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ahearne, Michael, and Adam Rapp. 2010. “The Role of Technology at the Interface between Salespeople and Consumers.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 30 (2): 111–20. doi: 10.2753/PSS0885-3134300202.

 Google Scholar

Cascio, Robert, Babu John Mariadoss, and Nacef Mouri. 2010. “The Impact of Management Commitment Alignment on Salespersons’ Adoption of Sales Force Automation Technologies: An Empirical Investigation.” Industrial Marketing Management 39 (7): 1088–96. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2009.12.010.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Homburg, Christian, Jan Wieseke, and Christina Kuehnl. 2010. “Social Influence on Salespeople’s Adoption of Sales Technology: A Multilevel Analysis.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 38 (2): 159–68. doi: 10.1007/s11747-009-0157-x.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Onyemah, Vincent, Scott D. Swain, and Richard Hanna. 2010. “A Social Learning Perspective on Sales Technology Usage: Preliminary Evidence from an Emerging Economy.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 30 (2): 131–42. doi: 10.2753/PSS0885-3134300204.

 Google Scholar

Ahearne, Michael, Adam Rapp, Babu John Mariadoss, and Shankar Ganesan. 2012. “Challenges of CRM Implementation in Business-to-Business Markets: A Contingency Perspective.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 32 (1): 117–29. doi: 10.2753/PSS0885-3134320110.

 Google Scholar

Levin, Michael A., Jared M. Hansen, and Debra A. Laverie. 2012. “Toward Understanding New Sales Employees’ Participation in Marketing-Related Technology: Motivation, Voluntariness, and past Performance.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 32 (3): 379–93. doi: 10.2753/PSS0885-3134320307.

 Google Scholar

Rapp, Adam, Lauren Skinner Beitelspacher, Niels Schillewaert, and Thomas L. Baker. 2012. “The Differing Effects of Technology on Inside vs. Outside Sales Forces to Facilitate Enhanced Customer Orientation and Interfunctional Coordination.” Journal of Business Research 65 (7): 929–936.

 Google Scholar

Rapp, Adam, Lauren Skinner Beitelspacher, Dhruv Grewal, and Douglas E. Hughes. 2013. “Understanding Social Media Effects across Seller, Retailer, and Consumer Interactions.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 41 (5): 547–66. doi: 10.1007/s11747-013-0326-9.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Limbu, Yam B., C. Jayachandran, and Barry J. Babin. 2014. “Does Information and Communication Technology Improve Job Satisfaction? The Moderating Role of Sales Technology Orientation.” Industrial Marketing Management 43 (7): 1236–45. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.06.013.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rollins, Minna, Brian Rutherford, and David Nickell. 2014. “The Role of Mentoring on Outcome Based Sales Performance: A Qualitative Study from the Insurance Industry.” International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring 12 (2): 119–32.

 Google Scholar

Hunter, Gary K., and Nikolaos G. Panagopoulos. 2015. “Commitment to Technological Change, Sales Force Intelligence Norms, and Salesperson Key Outcomes.” Industrial Marketing Management 50: 162–79. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.03.023.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Guesalaga, Rodrigo. 2016. “The Use of Social Media in Sales: Individual and Organizational Antecedents, and the Role of Customer Engagement in Social Media.” Industrial Marketing Management 54: 71–9. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.12.002.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hansen, Jared M., and Michael A. Levin. 2016. “The Effect of Apathetic Motivation on Employees’ Intentions to Use Social Media for Businesses.” Journal of Business Research 69 (12): 6058–66. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.06.009.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lacoste, Sylvie. 2016. “Sustainable Value Co-Creation in Business Networks.” Industrial Marketing Management 52: 151–62. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.05.018.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Quinton, Sarah, and Damien Wilson. 2016. “Tensions and Ties in Social Media Networks: Towards a Model of Understanding Business Relationship Development and Business Performance Enhancement through the Use of Linkedin.” Industrial Marketing Management 54: 15–24. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.12.001.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Itani, Omar S., Raj Agnihotri, and Rebecca Dingus. 2017. “Social Media Use in B2B Sales and Its Impact on Competitive Intelligence Collection and Adaptive Selling: Examining the Role of Learning Orientation as an Enabler.” Industrial Marketing Management 66: 64–79. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.06.012.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Nunan, Daniel, Olivier Sibai, Bruno Schivinski, and George Christodoulides. 2018. “Reflections on ‘Social Media: Influencing Customer Satisfaction in B2B Sales’ and a Research Agenda.” Industrial Marketing Management 75: 31–6. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.03.009.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Inyang, Eddie A. 2019. “How Social Media Use by Salespeople Translates into Sales Performance: The Mediating Role of Sales Strategy.” Marketing Management Journal 29 (1): 1–15.

 Google Scholar

Agnihotri, Raj. 2020. “Social Media, Customer Engagement, and Sales Organizations: A Research Agenda.” Industrial Marketing Management 90: 291–9. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.07.017.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bill, Fabian, Sven Feurer, and Martin Klarmann. 2020. “Salesperson Social Media Use in Business-to-Business Relationships: An Empirical Test of an Integrative Framework Linking Antecedents and Consequences.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 48 (4): 734–52. doi: 10.1007/s11747-019-00708-z.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Guenzi, Paolo, and Edwin J. Nijssen. 2020. “Studying the Antecedents and Outcome of Social Media Use by Salespeople Using a MOA Framework.” Industrial Marketing Management 90: 346–59. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.08.005.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bowen, Melanie, Christine Lai-Bennejean, Alexander Haas, and Deva Rangarajan. 2021. “Social Media in B2B Sales: Why and When Does Salesperson Social Media Usage Affect Salesperson Performance?” Industrial Marketing Management 96: 166–82. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.05.007.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Conde, Richard, Victor Prybutok, and Cameron Sumlin. 2021. “The Utilization of Online Sales Forums by Salespeople as a Mesosystem for Enhancing Sales-Activity Knowledge.” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 36 (4): 630–40. doi: 10.1108/JBIM-03-2020-0129.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Itani, Omar S., Ashish Kalra, Nawar N. Chaker, and Rakesh Singh. 2021. “Because You Are a Part of Me’: Assessing the Effects of Salesperson Social Media Use on Job Outcomes and the Moderating Roles of Moral Identity and Gender.” Industrial Marketing Management 98: 283–98. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.09.004.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rayburn, Steven W., Vishag Badrinarayanan, Sidney T. Anderson, and Aditya Gupta. 2021. “Continuous Techno-Training and Business-to-Business Salesperson Success: How Boosting Techno-Efficacy Enhances Sales Effort and Performance.” Journal of Business Research 133: 66–78. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.066.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Schmitt, Laurianne, Eric Casenave, and Jessie Pallud. 2021. “Salespeople’s Work toward the Institutionalization of Social Selling Practices.” Industrial Marketing Management 96: 183–96. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.05.008.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Agnihotri, Raj, Ashish Kalra, Haozhe Chen, and Patricia J. Daugherty. 2022. “Utilizing Social Media in a Supply Chain B2B Setting: A Knowledge Perspective.” Journal of Business Logistics 43 (2): 189–208. doi: 10.1111/jbl.12289.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cheng, Zixuan, Kirk Plangger, Feng Cai, Colin L. Campbell, and Leyland Pitt. 2023. “Charting Value Creation Strategies B2B Salespeople Use throughout the Sales Process: Learning from Social Media Influencers.” European Journal of Marketing 57 (3): 718–44. doi: 10.1108/EJM-11-2021-0922.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Itani, Omar S., Ashish Kalra, and Jen Riley. 2022. “Complementary Effects of CRM and Social Media on Customer Co-Creation and Sales Performance in B2B Firms: The Role of Salesperson Self-Determination Needs.” Information & Management 59 (3): 103621. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2022.103621.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Terho, Harri, Anna Salonen, and Meri Yrjänen. 2023. “Toward a Contextualized Understanding of inside Sales: The Role of Sales Development in Effective Lead Funnel Management.” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 38 (2): 337–52. doi: 10.1108/JBIM-12-2021-0596.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar