When and how sales manager feedback contributes to sales performance: the role of emotional labor and cross-selling

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to test the mediating effect of cross-selling behavior (CSB) on the relationship between sales manager feedback (i.e. output and behavioral) and sales performance, and the moderating effect of emotional labor (i.e. deep and surface acting) on this relationship. Design/methodology/approach The authors used two-wave multisource data: survey and objective sales performance (sales revenue) data collected from 300 door-to-door salespeople working at a South Korean cosmetics company. Findings The relationship between output feedback and sales performance was mediated by CSB. In addition, the positive relationship between output feedback and CSB was weakened by deep and surface acting, whereas that between behavioral feedback and CSB was strengthened by deep acting. Specifically, behavioral feedback had a positive relationship with CSB when salespeople engaged in a high level of deep acting. This relationship was not significant for low and medium levels of deep acting. The authors’ supplementary analyses indicated no significant three-way interaction effect between output feedback, behavioral feedback and emotional labor on CSB. Research limitations/implications Data collection from door-to-door salespeople in a single cosmetics company undermines the generalizability of the present findings. Practical implications By exploring the boundary conditions that strengthen or weaken the effectiveness of manager feedback, this study provides insights into how the two types of manager feedback can be effectively used to promote CSB and sales performance. Originality/value This study offers a nuanced understanding of the relative roles of output and behavioral feedback in CSB and the differential moderating effects of emotional labor on the two types of manager feedback.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 18 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.