You are on page 1of 33

This study explored how sales managers and salespeople construct and perform motivational communication.

Sullivan's (1988) Motivational Language Theory (MLT)was used as a starting point. This theory is critiqued and reinterpreted within a framework emphasizing multiple communication goals and multiple levels of communication competence. Participants included 24 sales managers and sales representatives from University Directories, a major publishing company of campus telephone directories. A thematic analysis was conducted on interview notes and transcripts, from which three major and four minor themes emerged. The experiences of three sales teams are explored to contextualize the themes, to illustrate deficiencies inMLT, and to highlight the potential ofthe alternative theoretical framework for explaining motivational communication. Findings demonstrate that motivational communication acts often address multiple communication goals and are open to multiple interpretations. Motivational communication considered competent by employees typically addresses multiple goals (instrumental, identity, and relational) by strategies of integration or separation and fits employees' beliefs about what constitutes competent communication. Managers therefore must pay attention to the multipie implications and interpretations of their motivational attempts and must adapt their communication strategically to employees' beliefs and values.

The Use of Communication to Motivate Coiiege Saies Teams


Theodore E. Zorn, Jr.
University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand Sarah E. Ruccio Broadcast Music, Inc., Nashville, TN

T ^anagers place extensive emphasis on eniployee motivation; in no V XVX type of organization is this more apparent than in sales organizations. As one sales manager said to us, "Motivation is everything. Without it you can't do the j o b . . . . If you don't make calis, you don't make sales. You can be talented, sharp, good-looking, whatever, but if you don't get up and go to work, you wiil fail." With saiespeopie's motivation socialiy constructed as central to empioyee performance and uitimateiy organizational performance and profits, it is no wonder that organizations spend millions of dollars every year to train managers in the skiils needed to motivate empioyees. Of course, such skiils are almost entirely communication skills. Given the perceived importance of managers' motivational communication skiils, it is perhaps surprising that organizationai communication scholars have paid such scant attention to motivational communication. Of course, there is extensive literature on supervisor-subordinate commtinication (see Jablin & Krone, 1994 for a review), feedback (see Cusella, 1987 for a review) and interpersonai influence (see Seiboid, Cantriii, & Meyers, 1985 for a review), and some work in ieadership communication (see Barge, 1994; Fairhurst, in press, for
468
TheJoumal of Business Communication. Volume 35, Number 4. October !998. pages 468-499 1998 by the Association for Business Communication

Motivating College Sales Teams / Zorn. Ruccio

469

reviews), all of which are conceptually related to motivational communication. Similariy, there is some research on motivation to communicate (see Zorn, 1993 for a review). However, there is aimost no work in the organizationai communication iiterature that directiy addresses managers' communicative attempts to increase employee work motivation. Steers and Porter (1991) define motivation as what energizes, directs, and sustains human behavior. Motivationai communication, therefore, is communication with the intended instrumental goal of energizing, directing, or sustaining the behavior of another. Instrumental goals, in turn, are the primary, or most explicit goals pursued in interaction. As Clark and Delia (1979) suggest, communicators typically pursue multiple goals in interaction, some of them implicit. Communication designed to motivate is an important component of - that is, one of a number of instrumentai goais pursued in - ieadersMp comjnunication and sujservisor-subordinate communication. The purpose of the study reported here is to begin to investigate this phenomenon. More specificaiiy, we set out to explore two issues. Rrst, we examined how sales managers and sales representatives construct and perform motivational processes. That is, how do managers construct and symbolically enact attempts to motivate sales representatives, and how do sales representatives construct and respond to these attempts? Because of our interest in understanding indi^idduals' unique and shared interpretations of sales motivation interactions and our commitment to the interpretive perspective (Putnam, 1983; Trujilio, 1992), the focus of this research question was on participants' meaningsboth shared and divergent ways they construed motivationai attempts and acted on their interpretations. Secondly, we were interested in why some motivational communication efforts were perceived as motivating, or competent, and others were not. These foci directed our study, from the choice of theoretical perspectives to methods. Research and Ttieory on Motivationai Comnnunication The literature on sales and sales management suggests that sales managers use a variety of methods to motivate salespeople. Prus (1989), who conducted an extensive ethnographic study of sales activity, suggested that "whatever companies do to facilitate sales (ordering goods, pricing, promotions, and so on) may be seen as beneficial in generating enthusiasm" (p. 268). This statement highlights the breadth and complexity of influences on motivation. However, IPrus highlighted several more direct types of manager-initiated attempts to motivate salespeople, including sales meetings that focus on training, policy developments, sales performance reviews, and discussion

470

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

of problems and practices. Another tactic is the motivational or inspirational meeting, which "may be led by company personnel or outsiders, but a central task is that of promoting enthusiasm" (Prus, 1989, p. 269; see also Dalrymple, 1988). Prus also found that goal or quota setting, feedback on performance, and incentive programs such as bonuses and sales contests are popular tools for motivating. Such contests are sometimes motivating both for the material rewards as well as for the recognition garnered from winning or performing well. Companysponsored social gatherings are also used to generate enthusiasm. Prus provides ample evidence, however, that none of these tactics are uniformly motivating; salespeople sometimes react in quite negative ways to attempts to motivate them. While there are myriad theories of motivation, Sullivan's (1988,- Mayfield, Mayfield, & Kopf, 1995) motivational language theory is the only theory that explicitly addresses motivational communication processes. The paucity of theorizing around the communicative aspects of motivation is surprising given that the process of managers attempting to motivate subordinates is largely a process of symbolically interacting with subordinates. However, the most popular theories of motivation all imply but do not recognize explicitly a central role for communication. For example, goal-setting theory (Locke & Latham, 1990) implies a process of managers communicating goals to subordinates or negotiating goals participatively with subordinates, yet the major constructs in the theory are goal specificity, goal difficulty - characteristics of the goals themselves - and goal acceptance, a psychological variable. Of course, it could be argued that certain leadership theories are in essence theories of motivational communication. In fact, the pathgoal theory of leadership (House, X971; 1996) draws explicitly on a theory of motivation - expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964) - in deriving its claims. However, motivational communication should at most be considered one dimension of leadership behavior (Rost, 1991). Furthermore, leadership theories are notoriously general in their treatment of communication, paying little attention to language or otber specific features of interaction and instead focusing on broad categories of behavior sucb as directing and supporting (Fairburst, in press; Mayfield et al., 1995; Zorn & Leichty, 1991). Still, certain leadership theories will no doubt be useful for understanding some aspects of motivational communication. Sullivan's motivation language theory (MLT) asserts tbat motivational communication can be categorized in terms of three kinds of speech acts: (a) uncertainty reduction acts, or "those tbat reduce employee uncertainty and increase bis or ber knowledge" (p. 104); (b) meaning-making acts, or "tbose tbat facilitate tbe employee's con-

Motivating College Saies Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

471

strtiction of cognitive schemas and scripts, which will be used to guide the empioyee in Ms or her work" (p. 104); and (c) aflirming/bonding acts, or "those that implicitly reaffirm the empioyee's sense of seif worth as a human being" (p. 104). Further, Suiiivan contends that current motivation theories address oniy one of these types, assuming that "uncertainty-reducing ianguage is the primary form of communication in organizational settings where workers are Diotivated" (Suiiivan, 1988, p. 106). For example, for goai-setting theory (Locke & Latham, 1990) what motivates is information that reduces process and goal uncertainty; for seif-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1982), it is information that reduces uncertainty regarding one's abiiities; fbr expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964), information that reduces reward uncertainty^ is motivating; and for equity theory (Adams, 1965), information that reduces fairness uncertainty motivates. Finaiiy, Suiiivan contends that all three kinds of speech acts - not just those focused on uncertainty reduction - are important to motivationai communication, and managers who use ail three types of acts wiii be most successfui in motivating their empioyees. The second kind of speech act MLT addresses is ianguage as meaning-making. Specifically, Sullivan refers to communication that leads employees to feel their place in the organization makes sense and is meaningful and, in doing so, encourages the development of schemata that guide them to choices consistent with the organization's goals. Sullivan suggests that as managers interact with empioyees in routine, informal roie-play, they unconsciously share with employees the meanings attached to both of their roles, thus unconsciously inspiring and motivating employees to deveiop appropriate work behavior "from the organization's point of view" (p. 109). The third type of speech act that MLT addresses is informai, personal communication with empioyees that develops interpersonal relationships and human bonding. This kind of communication, Sullivan (1988) explains, "does not reduce uncertainty or foster meaning making: it simply affirms human existence" (p. 110). MLT claims that a manager's interest in getting to know employees on an informal, personal level is motivating because it makes an empioyee feel like a human being working with another human being, instead of just another number on the assembly line. Sullivan bases his theory on some of the tenets of speech act theory (Austin, 1962). He suggests that Austin's tripartite distinction among locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts corresponds respectively to meaning-making, bonding, and uncertainty-reducing communication. MLT is useful and provocative in pointing out the limitations of extant motivational theories and suggesting aspects of mainagerial com-

472

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

munication that contribute to motivation and that are unrecognized in these theories. While useful, however, MLT is flawed in several significant ways. First, it is overly simplistic in its classification of motivational communication acts as being one of three discrete types, each serving a single function. As many communication scholars have suggested, messages are almost always multifunctional (Clark & Delia, 1979), meaning they either are intended to address, or may be perceived as having implications for (or both), multiple communication goals. This seems to be tbe case with the three kinds of acts included in MLT. For example, it is likely (perhaps necessary) tbat communication that creates new meanings or schemata or that "afiSrms human existence" through communing will reduce uncertainty, and that any reduction of uncertainty or act of communion is simultaneously a process of creating or modifying meanings. Thus, in part because each act accomplishes multiple goals (and perhaps in part because of imprecise definitions), the three kinds of acts posited in the theory are not mutually exclusive or easily separable. A second and related problem is that Sullivan seems to have misinterpreted speecb act theory. As Coulthard (1977) explained.
It is not Austin's intention to suggest that in speaking one has the option of performing one or another of these three types of speech act; in fact one normally performs all three simultaneously, but it is useful for analytical purposes to isolate them. (p. 18)

Tbat is, speech act theorists suggest that speech acts simulfaneously convey referential meaning (the locutionary act), do things (e.g., make offers - the illocutionary act), and have consequences (e.g., infiuence others to act - the perlocutionary act). So, tbe three aspects of messages tbat Austin identified do not seem to refer to three different instrumental functions of communication, but ratber three dimensions of commxmicative acts. Speech act theorists would consider each of the three types of acts suggested by Sullivan as having locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary dimensions. A third concern with MLT is a methodological one. In spite of messages being multifunctional, managers and employees may very well construct the meaning of a(n intended) motivational message as empbasizingprimari/j uncertainty reduction, bonding, or tbe meaningfulness of work. Sullivan suggests that to ascertain the nature of tbe act requires an emic approacb (Pike, 1967), one that "focuses on the identification of tbe concepts and tbeories held by subjects.... In tbe case of MLT, employees must tell wbetber a given communication ... reduced uncertainty, helped the employee make sense of bis or her lot, or developed bonding" (Sullivan, 1988, p. 113). This assertion is generally consistent witb an interpretive approach, yet it does not go far enougb. Specifically, an interpretive approacb would riot privilege

Motivating College Sales Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

473

a single correct interpretation of an act, as Sullivan does in assuming the employee's interpretation is the one that matters. Trujillo (1992) argues that the goal of interpretive research is to identifjj^ "multiple, plausible interpretations" (p. 395) of organizational communication. So, like Sullivan, we consider employees' interpretations of motivational communication important, especially since their interpretations are most closely linked to their responses (i.e., motivated action). However, we also are interested in how managers construct their motivational communication performances, in part because of the pragmatic value of understanding the choices managers make in attempting motivational communication. That is, managers make such choices based on their own implicit theories of communication, and these are important to understand. Additionally, the researcher's perspective as an outsider is valid and valued as well. We do not assvmie interactants are always candid or conscious of the implications of their communicative choices; thus, researchers may illuminate dimensions of interaction that go unnoticed or unexplained by interactants themselves. Other observers may have still different interpretations of a given speech act, interpretations that would be dismissed as irrelevant if only the employee's interpretation is considered. Thus, we share Sullivan's concern for recognizing and understanding the role of communication in motivation, and we applaud his bixtadenic^ of the purview of theorizing on managerial attemptstomotivate beyond those of traditional motivation theories. Where we diverge from his view is in our emphasis on the multifunctional nature of communication and multiple perspectives on motivational speech acts. It is in part the multifunctional nature of communication that enables multiple interpretations of the same act. That is, since acts often have implications for multiple issues of concern to communicators (e.g., the particular topic of discussion as well as the identities and relationships of the interactants), communicators often focus on different issues and come away with different interpretations of what was said and done. Thus, these two points of disagreement that we have with MLT are closely intertwined. Bather than seeing motivational communication in terms of a taxonomy of speech act types, we would suggest a more advantageous conceptualization would consider motivational communication in terms of multiple ^oa/s. Clark and Delia (1979) suggested that communicators have three broad classes of functional objectives whenever they interact. First, they must address "the instrumental issue which is the focus of interaction" (p. 196). Instrumental goals in supervisor-subordinate conversations may include motivation, persuasion, or instruction, to name a few. Second, communicators have relational goa][s, i.e., a concern with defining or. framing the relationship between the

474

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

interactants. Finaiiy, communicators pursue identity goais, or attempts to convey situated identities of seif and other. These tiiree kinds of goais are often seen as competing, or in tension (O'Keefe & Deiia, 1982). For example, communicating goais to a subordinate may threaten the relationship and the preferred identities of both manager and subordinate. Communicators may manage these tensions either by (a) selecting one of the goals as most important, and addressing it in spite of the fact that doing so may undermine the other goals, (b) separating or sequencing one's communicative attempts, such that the communicator addresses the competing goals in separate (albeit often contiguous) speech acts, or (c) integrating the competing goals into a strategy that transcends or resolves the tension (O'Keefe & Delia, 1982). Furthermore, these choices may be seen as developmentaiiy ordered. Separation is a more deveiopmentaiiy advanced strategy than seiection since multiple goals are addressed through separation, and integration is more sophisticated still, since an integration strategy essentially recasts the communication situation to resolve the tension among goais. Competent communication, then, is more iikeiy to be characterized by separation and (especiaiiy) integration strategies. Suiiivan seems to consider oniy the possibilities of selection and separation strategies, since he focuses on discrete acts with single functions, versus goals that might be simultaneously addressed. This alternative to motivation language theory posits that competent motivational communication is not just communication that includes all three types of acts. Rather, it is communication that satisfactorily addresses muitipie goals. This may be accomplished through a strategy of separation, but is often most effectiveiy done through integration strategies. Furthermore, the degree to whdch a message addresses satisfactorily aii three types of goais is not inherent in the utterance (aithough some messages are more likely to be perceived as integrating goals), nor can we determine the message's goal focus simpiy by asking the recipient (even though the recipient's interpretation shouid be vaiued). Rather, the competence of motivationai commimication is the resuit of a dynamic interplay among the communicators, the messages, and the context. Communicators always negotiate the situated meanings of messages in a particular physical, social, and psychological context. To theorize this issue, we turn to a theory of communication competence in which this negotiation is central. Communication Competence in Motivationai Communication Of interest to us is whether the motivational communication attempts of managers are perceived to be motivating, that is, the degree

Motivating College Sales Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

47E>

to which they are competent attempts at motivational communication. We were guided by a model developed by Jablin and colleagues (Jablin, Cude, House, Lee, & Roth, 1994; Jablin & Sias, in press), which conceptualizes communication competence in organizations at multiple levels of analysis. This model contends that not only individuals but also groups and organizations can be characterized as more or less competent. Furthermore, and of particular importance to us, these multiple levels of competence are mutually influencing. For example, the shared knowledge of a context, such as the forms of communication that are considered appropriate for that context, constitutes an important component of the group's or organization's communication competence, while the values and assumptions embedded in tlus knowledge influence judgments of individuals' competence. In essence, this describes a process of structuration (Giddens, 1979; McPhee, 1985) in which, as Weick (1987) argued, "structures form when communication uncovers shared occupational specialties, shared social characteristics, or shared values that people want to preserve and expand" (pp. 97-98). These structures, such as rules and norms about appropriate forms of communication, subsequently guide choices and interpretations made by members of a culture. In support of this claim, Zorn and Violanti (1996) found that individuals with developed communication abilities were more likely to be rewarded by organizations that valued communication than by organizations placing a low value on communication. In this example, the structures that had emerged - i.e., norms valuing certain communication abilities - guided subsequent organizational actions such as promoting members who demonstrated these abilities. Further, Jablin and Sias (in press) consider communication competence as both an attribution - i.e., a judgment about someone or some group as effective - and a set of resources, including knov/ledge (about communication in a context), skill (in executing communicative performances), and motivation to communicate. It is important to consider both these senses of "competent," since they do not necessarily converge. One may have substantial communicative resources to bring to bear on a situation, yet be perceived - e.g., because of others' predispositions - as incompetent. The reverse also occurs, in which someone with few resources is judged competent. Of course, having substantial resources, while it is no guarantee, increases the likelihood that others will attribute competence to a communicator. Thus, our alternative model suggests the following for motivational communication in sales teams. Managers' motivational communication attempts constitute symbolic actions that may embody intentions to address (and will always have potential implications for) multiple communication goals. As MLT suggests, these attempts may

476

The Journal of Business Communication 35:4 October 1998

be motivating because they are inteippreted as reducing uncertainty; because they give meaning to tasks, the workplace, or to oneseif in the workpiace; or because they create a sense of bonding or affinity between supervisor and subordinate. We might aiso quibbie witli MLT's insistence on these three particular functions, yet space limitations prevent a thorough criticism of this aspect of the theory. While wefindthem usefui, they constitute themseives a sociaiiy constructed means of categorizing functions of motivationai communication. We wouid suggest that future research consider whether there might be morefiruitfuiaiternatives. DivergingfromMLT, we argue that categorizing individuai motivationai speech acts as performing one or another of these functions based solely on the employee's perception is not the most useful way to proceed. Rather, since many motivational communication acts will simuitaneousiy reduce uncertainty, shape meaning and create affinity (and any motivating speech act wiii accompiish at ieast two ofthe three), and since they aiso may be seen as having muitipie intended purposes and may be interpreted in muitipie ways, we argue that the researcher's task is more compiex than suggested by MLT. Simpiy put, the researcher must consider (at ieast) four aspects of motivationai communication: the intentions ofthe manager; the message itseif (particuiariy, as its linguistic structure manifests theoreticaiiy meaningfui qualities such as selection, separation, or integration of goals); the contextual-historical situation; and the interpretations ofthe employee. As Suiiivan argues, an emic perspective is necessary to grasp the interplay of these aspects. However, rather than simply assessing the empioyee's perception, the researcher shouid (when possibie) identify aii four ofthe aspects of motivationai communication described above. Motivational communication acts are most likeiy to be judged as competent by employees when they address (especialiy through integrating) muitipie communication goais, when their construction fits the saies team's shared vaiues and assumptions about what constitutes competent communication, and when the manager has appropriate communication resources for the situation, such as the abiiity to adapt communication to empioyees' values andheliefs, personal and professional credibility, and motivation to engage in motivationai diaiogue. It is possible that these wili aii converge, Le., that messages that are intended by the manager and appear to the researcher to address muitipie goais are aiso interpreted by empioyees to be motivating, but such is not necessariiy the case. Our goais for the following study were first to explore managers' and salespeople's construction of motivational communication, particularly the primary ways they described motivational communica-

Motivating College Sales Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

477

tion attempts. Second, we attempted to investigate some contextualized examples of motivational communication attempts to explore the nature of attempts considered competent by the participants. In particular, we were interested in using these examples to illustrate the criticisms of MLT outlined above and to demonstrate how the alternative framework we have proposed might explain motivational communication more satisfactorily.
Method

To investigate motivation in a sales context, we conducted a retrospective case-study of six sales teams and their managers at a company called University Directories (UD). This section presents the methods and procedures used to conduct the study, including a description of the participants and interview procedures for both sales managers and sales representatives, and the data analysis procedures employed.
The Organizational Context and Participants

UD was founded 20 years ago and is now the largest publisher of campus telephone directories in the United States, serving over 65 colleges and universities in 34 states. The organization is part of the Village Companies, a conglomerate of 10 media-related companies based in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. UD has contracts with over 65 universities and colleges to produce campus telephone directories, iiicluding student, faculty, and staff listings, emergency numbers, academic calendars, sports schedules, departmental listings, and yellow page advertising. Sales of yellow page advertising by student sales representatives are UD's primary source of profit. Participants were twenty-four sales employees of University Directories who worked during the summer of 1994. UD hires college students each summer to sell advertising space in campus directories. In the summer of 1994, UD employed nearly 160 summer sales representatives (reps), including the second author, who worked independently selling yellow page advertising to reach their personal aad team sales goals. Four percent of the 160 reps, quit or were fired in the summer of 1994. In the summer of 1994, UD employed five permanent sales managers: one Local Sales Director and four Regional Sales Managers at the upper two levels of management. TMrty-nine temporary managers employed just for the summer represented the lower three levels of the organization: four Area Sales Managers, 15 Territory Sales Managers, and 20 Local Sales Managers. The sales managers ranged from 24 to 28 years old. Each manager had sold for UD as a student and was still involved in the selling process, primarily by "double team-

478

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

ing" with sales reps - i.e., accompanying individual sales reps on sales calls to help them improve, and more pertinent to tbis study, to keep them motivated. Each year sales reps are recruited nationwide and are all trained in late May in Chapel Hill. In 1994, each rep was assigned to a team comprised of one to seven reps and a manager. Each team sold for a contracted scbool somewhere in the United States. Teams did not normally interact with each otber after the initial training. After being trained, each sales rep was given a specific territory in tbe area in wbicb tbe scbool at wbicb she or be was selling was located. Each team met together every business day at 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. From 9:00 to 5:00 each rep usually worked alone in his or ber territory, making calls to businesses in tbat area and selling as many yellow page advertisements as possible. Where tbe team was located geographically determined how mucb contact reps had witb sales managers. In territories near tbe bome office, reps bad mucb more contact witb all levels of management. Some teams and some individual reps sold for more tban one scbool over tbe course of tbe summer. Eacb sales rep had a personal sales goal tbat contributed to tbe team's sales goal. Tbe average personal goal was US $26,000 for an average selling period of 10 weeks. Reps received 15% commission of all collected revenues for their accounts sold. Tbe average earnings for a summer was approximately US $3500. Nine managers and fifteen sales representatives were interviewed. Our strategy was to include managers at eacb level, plus multiple participants - managers and sales reps - on a small number of sales teams, so that we could explore multiple perspectives on tbe motivational communication within tbose teams. Tbe managers included represented allfivelevels of the sales management hierarchy at UD: tbe Local Sales Director, a full-time employee wbo worked out of the bome ofiice and oversaw all sales made by UD; two Regional Sales Managers, permanent employees who worked out of tbe bome office, and wbo eacb oversaw sales in a specific region of tbe coimtry, for example, tbe Soutbeast; one Area Sales Manager, a summer employee wbo oversaw a specific number of teams within one particular region; three Territorial Sales Managers, summer employees wbo were eacb assigned to one specific team of sales reps by living in tbe same area witb tbem; and two Local Sales Managers, summer employees wbo were eacb assigned to one specific team of sales reps by living in tbe same area witb them and serving as salespeople tbemselves. Two of the managers were women; seven were men. The 15 salespeople represented six different teams wbo sold for UD during the Summer of 1994 and wbo bad some sort of contact witb

iVlGtivating College Saies Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

479

these managers. Five of the six saies teams had 2-4 salespeople represented in our sample, along with the team managers. One team had only one sales rep included, along with the team's manager. Four of the sales representatives were women; 11 were men; all were either college students or recent college graduates. All but one of the sales reps interviewed performed adequately to very well according to the performance standards set by UD in the form of sales goals. Outstanding performers were considered those who reached or surpassed their sales goals, and adequate performers reached within several thousand dollars of their sales goals. The one salesperson who quit was well below reaching her sales goal. In the next section, sales managers are referred to as Manager 1 through Manager 9. Managers 1-6 were those who had daily contact with the six different sales teams. Managers 7-9 represent those at the highest levels ofthe sales management hierarchy. These managers had contact with all reps at training and had almost daily contact with teams 2 and 5. Sales representatives are referred to by the number of the manager with whom they had daily contact and by a letter to distinguish among sales reps on a single team. For example. Manager 1 supervised Reps lA and iB, and Manager 2 supervised Reps 2A, 2B, 2C, and 2D.
Procedure

The Local Sales Director granted access to names and phone numbers of UD employees for the purposes of this study. Because the Local Sales Director is most familiar with the entire UD sales force, she provided a list of all full-time sales managers and six sales teams comprised of their team managers and sales representatives. The list was diverse in gender, performance, and experience. Twenty-five percent of this population was female. After receiving this list, the second author called each employee, briefly explained the study, and asked each person if he or she would like to participate. Of 10 managers called, 9 agreed to be interviewed; of 21 sales representatives called, we made contact with 16,15 of whom agreed to be interviewed. Because most participants lived in difierent cities or states, onethird ofthe interviews were conducted in person; the others were conducted by phone. All interviews were conducted by the second author. The interviewer made extensive notes during all interviews, trying to capture relevant quotes verbatim and in addition recorded all but five of the interviews. The interviews averaged about 45 minutes. Interviews with both managers and sales reps were semi-structured. The interviewer had a brief list of open-ended questions prepared to serve as a general guide. She used probes as needed to encourage both

480

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

managers and sales reps to talk about their interactions with each other. Our intent was to gather specific examples and incidents of interaction between managers and reps - especially attempts to motivate the sales rep - and the interviewees' constructions of these examples. Topics included in both manager and rep interview guides were, in sequence (a) the perceived roles of manager and rep, (b) the amount of contact they had, (c) thoughts and feelings about their interactions, (d) the manager's perceived goals for interactions with reps, (e) types of motivators used by managers, (f) the perceived success of the motivators used, (g) what motivators were perceived as most effective, and (h) whether and how motivators were discussed. Note that the sequence of topics proceeded from general to specific - i.e., asking about manager-rep interactions generally before proceeding to ask more specifically about motivational tactics. This strategy was designed to elicit participants' descriptions of interaction and avoid prematurely imposing our categories on them.
Thematic Analysis

After completing the interview's, we used Owen's (1984) thematic analysis to interpret the interview notes and transcriptions. This method allows the researcher to identify themes within individual interviewees' responses, thus preserving individual perspectives, in addition tofindingthemes common to all or most interviewees. Wood, Dendy, Dordek, Germany, and Varallo (1994) argued that "thematic analysis is doubly interpretive because it not only probes symbolic constructions, but also relies on discursive accounts as the primary data that reveal the meanings [participants] generate for their experiences" (p. ii6). Owen (1984) gave three criteria for a theme: (a) recurrence of the same thread of meaning in different words; (b) repetition of words, phrases, or sentences; and (c) forcefulness of vocal inflection, volume, or dramatic pauses. Of course, we were not interested in just any themes, but those related to the research questions. Thus, a theme from a manager's standpoint was comprised of statements describing how she or he attempted to motivate sales reps, including what she or he described as competent motivational attempts. A theme frqm a sales rep's standpoint is comprised of how she or he described managers' attempts to motivate her or him, including whether or not those attempts were considered competent attempts. The second author conducted the initial thematic analysis, then reviewed and refined it with the first author.
Secondary Interviews

After completing the thematic analysis of the interviews, a second round of interviews was conducted with one-third of the interviewees

Motivating College Saies Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

481

to confirm and refine the analysis. Tompkins (1994) argued that one ofthe major principles of rigor in qualitative research is that of recalcitrance, suggesting the need "to report how the subjects studied responded to a complete 'piayback' ofthe resuits" ofthe researcii (p. 50). Similarly, Prey, Botan, Friedman, & Kreps (1991) point out that one way to "minimize potential threats to vaiidity" (p. 250) in interpretive research is to conduct muitipie interviews, to increase the likeiihood that analyses reflect participants' - not just researchers' perspectives. Thus, three managers andfivesaies reps were interviewed a second time. In these discussions, the second author expiained to the interviewees our analysis of what they had said in their interviews in terms of the themes found in their interviews and asked them to comment OB our interpretations, especiaily to explain if they saw things dilFerently. None of the eight participants interviewed a second time suggested changes to the analysis.
Case Studies

The case studies were constructedfrominterviews with participaints. In each of the three cases we focused on, we interviewed at least the team manager and three reps from the team. We also relied upon the second author's experience as a salesperson at UD. Thus, we had multiple sources of evidence, which Yin (1984) suggests as thefirstprinciple of rigor in case study research. In addition to choosing to focus on these three cases because of the substantial date available on each, we also chose them because they are quite different from each other, thereby illustrating different contexts for, approaches to, and consequences of motivational communication.
Results and Discussion

Three major themes and four minor themes dominated the interviews. A major theme was defined as one that emerged in the interviews of at ieast three managers and at least four sales reps. Ali miinor themes emerged in fewer than five total interviews. Most themes included several subthemes or more specific manifestations of the theme across the supporting interviews. Because this study emphasizes different as well as common perspectives, we will first present ali themes, focusing on their respective subthemes. Then, for the sake of illustrating the theoretical issues described above, we will explore in depth the contrasting experiences of three sales teams. The three major themes were (a) Modeling Success, which involved attempts to motivate by using one's actions or personal experiences as an example of what others can or shouid do; (b) Individualized Attention, or attempts to discern and address the personal concems

482

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

and needs of others; and (c) Exuding Energy and Having Fun, or conveying a positive, energetic approach both on and off the job. These themes and their various subthemes represented the most prominent perceptions from both nianagement and sales representatives of how managers attempted to motivate reps. Tkble i gives subthemes, definitions, and examples of each major theme. Minor themes, with their definitions and examples, are included in Table 2. Any thematic anaiysis is itself a social construction, an interpretation by the researchers and infiuenced by their experiences. However, the foiiowup interviews substantiated that the themes identified "rang true" for the participants in representing their experiences. All of these themes are interesting as much for what was not said as for what was. That is, many of the variables or motivators most prominent in extant motivationai theory were not prominent in these individuais' interpretations of motivational communication. There was relativeiy little mention hy either reps or managers of motivators such as fairness (Adams, 1965), specific and difficult goals (Locke & Latham, 1990), or valued rewards (Vroom, 1964). This is not to say that the variabies identified in these theories are not important to understanding motivation, but simpiy that they were not constructed by these managers and reps as significant in their motivation-reiated interaction. Very apparent in the themes is the context of the study. Whiie we do not claim that the motivational communication strategies employed by managers at UD are unique to that organization, several themes seem to refiect the particuiar circumstances of the UD saies environment. For example, the relative youth and inexperience ofthe participants are reflected throughout, especially in the subthemes Encouraging, Providing Constant Friendship, and Having Social Fun. For example, many of the reps were inexperienced and insecure, which is reflected in the Encouraging subtheme; managers attempted to maintain reps' motivation by offering sympathetic support and encouragement. Providing Constant Friendship and Having Social Fun also seemed to reflect a "coiiege mentaiity," in which these young peopie spent a great deai of their time going out together in the evenings. These iatter two subthemes aiso seem to reflect the fact that many of the students iived together or were assigned to distant locations with their teams; they naturaliy spent a great deal of time together as they found themselves otherwise alone in unfamiiiar surroundings. Double Teaming as a subtheme reflected a conscious strategy encoxiraged by UD for experienced salespeople (i.e., team managers) to provide onthe-job training to novice salespeople. The picttire that emerges then, is of a group of young, inexperienced, and insecure sales reps being "taken by the hand" by slightly older, substantiaiiy more experienced and more confident managers. These

Motivating College Sales Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

483

Table 1

Major Themes
Theme Modeiing success Subtheme Definition Sharing personal stories Tellii^ reps about their own difficulties and successes as a means of inspiring or encouraging them Sample Quote i would tell them the story of when I was a sales rep. The fourth day on the job I called my Dad from a pay phone at a truck stop crying. I said I can't do this.... My Dad said "Tell me what your presentation is." I went through the whole thing and he said... "Talk to them like they're a business. Let's say you're going to a bike shop - go in there with a calculator and a piece of paper and say one mountain bike is $450 - this ad is only $300. If you sell just one mountain bike, you've paid for the ad." . . . I always tell reps this story. (Manager 7) I spent a good week or two with him double teaming - he would watch the way I sold, and I commented on his - he improved. Double teaming was the best thing they got from me going out and adding my successful teaching to their |presentations] and seeing my success. (Manager 3)

Modeling success

Double teaming

Going with reps on sales calls; in doing so, showing them "how to" and providing feedback

Modeling success

The biggest thing for me was to be an example. DemonWorking long strating hours, demonstrat- I was up before anyone else, and meetings started on time. Whether I was out selling hard work ii^ effort with them or on the phone making appointments, I worked hard ~ they knew that. I was an example. (Manager 1) Pointing to Suggesting reps the future would benefit from hrd work just as managers had done The role of sales manager at UD is to have a positive impact on college students' lives. Once I did this program for a summer, I knew the impact it had - it changed the way I looked at things. I want to have some effect on people. . . . The least significant thing is i;eaching them to be a good salesperson. It's to shov/ them they can get what I got out of it: a fulltime job. (Manager 8) When I came in [to the job] I found out my manager had not worked or lived in [the area where I was selling]. I feel a sales manager should be able to know and answer questions about the market... He - or she - should also be supportive.... I shouldn't be told I shouldn't complain. They should say, "Okay.... why is this happening? Let's think of different ways we can deal with this. (Rep 5A) The girl [who recruited me] told me it was an art job... .The job wasn't whati expected. [My manager would] tell me what I did right and wrong... he'd be encouraging. He kept telling me, "I know . . . you can sell." He pushed the art thing. I'd draw sjjec ads - he encouraged me to do that because it helped my sales. (Hep 4A)

Modeling success

Individualized attention

Problent Solving

Finding out their personal and jobrelated concerns and helping reps work through them

Individualized attention

Encourag- Providing recogniing tion, assurance, and positive feedback

Continued

484

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

Table 1 continued Major Themes Theme Subtheme


Exuding energy/ Having fun

Definition

Sample Quote
I have a total positive mental attitude - 1 try to have energy - be positive . . . someone who can come in and energize people.... I like to use inspiration - especially because this [sales period] is only ten weeks.... They need to have fun. Fun is a major motivator if they don't like what they're doing, they won't do it. (Manager 5) I like to have social fun - buy people beer.... I did that because they thought, "He's a cool guy, he's fun to party with, he's someone who has my interests. I don't mind working for this person at all." Plus it builds a lot of trust. I think with college kids, if you drink a beer, go to a ball game, they'll be like, "Hey, he's laid back, he's not a jerk - I'll listen to what he has to say." You have to talk to them like people, like college students, not Rep #23. (Manager 5) [My manager] and I would go for walks at night - it was our time to talk about some things - she was really cool - we're a lot alike she had the same approach to life as me. She always made time for that. Sometimes she'd buy us trinkets. She also got us gift certificates [and]... we all went and picked out dresses. (Rep 6A)

Conveying Focusir^ on the a positive positive as an attitude attempt to energize reps

Exuding energy/ Having fun

Having social fun

Initiatit^ and participating with reps in games, outings

Exuding energy/ Having fun

Providing constant friendship

Bonding through spending time together, personal talk

managers spent considerable time with the reps, training them, encouraging them, heiping them solve problems, and even befriending them. The close relationships, as weil as the mentoring and coaching, became a primary source of motivation for the novice salespeopie. Of course, this generaiization does not describe aii the manager-rep reiationships at UD, as wiil be seen in the case studies that foliow. However, it provides a reasonably good "snapshot" ofthe way motivational communication was typically enacted at this organization. The motivational communication strategy inherent in each of these themes is undoubtedly used at other sales organizations (Pnis, 1989), yet the particuiar manifestation of individual strategies and the particular configuration of strategies (from aii those possibie) reflect the unique situation we found in the UD saies teams. Aiso of interest is how intertwined are constructions of motivational communication for these participants with related concepts such as instructional communication and social support. That is, the themes reflect how the sales reps and managers discussed motivational communication, yet some of the themes might just as easily be invoked to discuss other functions of communication. For example. Double Tteaming, which involves showing reps how to sell and giving them feed-

Motivating College Safes Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

485

back on their selling, seems at least as much a training or instructional strategy as it does a motivational one. Yet, the reps described it as a /ay managers attempted and sometimes succeeded in motivating them. This overlap with related functions of communication is not surprising given the inherent ambiguity of language generally and the ambiguity of motivation more specifically. If, as the participant vsrbom we introduced in the first paragraph said, salespeople often believe that motivation is "everything," it will undoubtedly be confiated with other contributors to job performance in everyday discourse.
Table 2 Minor Themes laeme Definition Sample Quote This [promotion] was motivating because they gave me an opportunity because they felt I pulled so much out of the [first school's] territory - it was an expression of confidence and faith in my ability.... They sat me down on a personal level and expressed a lot of confidence in me. I had responsibility, and I didn't want to let them down. (Rep 5B) I started getting behind.... [My manager] would break it down - he'd say don't worry about the whole $30,000 - he'd redefine my personal goals if the goals got too high. As long as he would redefine them in realistic terms, it would help me get out there and succeed. (Rep 2B) Instead of double teaming he'd call all the doctors or all the lawyers in the phone book and set up appointments for each of u s . . . . That was motivating because you'd wanna keep him highly aware of the fact that you'd take his hard work and turn it into a sale - or he might stop giving you those good leads. (Rep IC) {Our manager] gave logistical support - here's the facts, here's where you are, here's where you need to be - everything they teach him to tell us. Those of us reaching above goal knew this already - this was not motivating.... Manager training gave him stories to tell us - he would have contrived stories from sales manager training this was way below where we were - it was a cheesy waste of time. (Rep 3B)

Empowering Giving the rep reps w/ responsibility for responsibility managing a small team and communieating expectations of success Breaking down sales goals Breaking down the rep's overall personal sales goal into weekly and daily goals

Contributing to reps' sales

Manager made contacts, scheduled appointments, and made sales, then gave his profits to winners of contests he created Not providing what the reps wanted; engaging in motivational attempts that were contrived, "fluff," not helpful

Demotivating reps

Not surprisingly then, the themes also bear a notable similarity to certain conceptualizations of leadership. Kouzes and Posner's (1987) model, for example, identifies five leadersbip dimensions, three of which are "modeling the way," "enabling others to act," and "encouraging the heart" (p. 14). These dimensions, as they are defined by Kouzes and Posner, seem to overlap substantially witb our three major themes as well as with the minor theme Empowering Reps witb Responsibility. Since many contemporary conceptualizations o^ leadership are focused f

486

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

on stimulating "performance beyond expectations," to quote the title of Bass' (1985) influential book on leadership, it seems iogicai that conceptuaiizations of motivation and leadership are closeiy related. To understand why some motivational communication attempts are perceived as motivating and others not, we explored three of the teams more fully. Our objectives in the case studies that foliow were (a) to provide contextuaiized exampies ofthe themes above, (b) to iiiustrate our criticisms of MLT and (c) to demonstrate how the aiternative motivationai communication theory we articulated may overcome some of the problems with MLT.
Case Study One: Motivating Top Performers

Team 1 consisted of a manager who had been the second leading UD salesperson nationaiiy the year before, pius four of his friends and fraternity brothers from a prestigious midwestern university. There was aiso one other member of the team who did not know the others prior to working with them; we wiil refer to him as the "outsider." This team, iike many others, was working far away from home, and severai of them iived together with the manager. Aii of them sociaiized together after work and on weekends. They described themseives as cohesive and having "a iot of competition between us, but encouragement, too" (Rep lC). All three reps interviewed mentioned that they didn't want to let the team down, and "didn't want to be the one iagging behind" (Rep lC). This team became the top-performing UD sales team in the country, with ali but the outsider winning a trip to Jamaica, which UD awarded to its top 18 performers nationally. The three reps we interviewed were consistent in their praise of Manager l's communication (and general managerial) competence. Manager 1 and the reps from this team described a number of diflerent strategies by which motivational communication was enacted. Their descriptions generally converged in describing a developmentai approach in which the manager concentrated in the eariy weeks on Modeling Success (especiaiiy Doubie Teaming, Demonstrating Hard Work, and Sharing Personal Stories) and Individualized Attention (both Problem Solving and Encouraging), then later Contributing to Saies Goals by setting up appointments and making sales. It is worth noting that Contributing to Sales Goals was a minor theme, mentioned only by the members of Team 1. As Manager 1 summarized: "Every morning for the first four weeks I double teamed with each person. For the nextfiveweeks, 90% of my day was on the phone." Rep iC concurred: "He did some double teaming in the first four weeks because we were getting acciimated, then... he heiped us out most by caiiing businesses A iittie motivation, and a iot of organization."

iVlotivating Cofiege Sales Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

487

Manager i focused extensively on the theme of Modeling Success. In the following excerpt, he focused specifically on Modeling Success through Demonstrating Hard Work:
They looked to me because of what I had accomplished the year before - 1 was the second-leading rep in the country the year before. People respected me because I was successful in the past. They respected what I said. They knew it could be done. I did well so they can do well, too.. . . The biggest thing for me was to be an example. I was up before anyone else, and meetings started on time. Whether I was out selling with them or on the phone making appointments, I worked hard - they knew that. I was an example.

The reps from Team i also emphasized their manager's use of Modeling Success. They looked to him as a good example of not only doing the job, but doing it better than aimost everyone else. Rep lA described the manager's use of Sharing Personal Stories in Modeling Success:
[He] definitely motivated me. He was in a good position to motivate us. He sold the year before and did well so there were constant anecdotes of his progress. He'd say "if I can do it, you can do it" - he'd challenge us - he'd say "with our skill we should be number one in the country." That was his number one refrain.

From the perspective of MLT, what sorts of speech acts did Manager 1 use? MLT would evaluate his effectiveness in terms of using a varietj;- of types of acts; that is. Manager i wouid be predicted to be successful by MLT if he used ail three types of speech acts. ]Prom our goals-based framework, we looked instead at the degree to which his message strategies managed multiple, competing goals, whether the manager brought substantial communicative resources to the task of motivational communication, and the degree to which bis messages fit the group culture - i.e., whether the ruies and vaiues impiied by the manager's acts were congruent with those embedded in the team's "knowledge" of communication. Consider the exampie of Rep lA's description of the manager's use of Sharing Personal Stories (quoted above). Sullivan (1988) would likely classify this as an uncertainty-reducing act. That is, the manager reduced the reps' uncertainty regarding how they could be successful - e.g., the reps learned what the manager did to be successful and whether they can be successful, by communicating that success is possible, since the manager is "living proof" of it. That is. Rep lA's recollection ofthe "lesson" ofthe story - i.e., the manager saying "if I can do it, you can do it" - is in part an attempt to clarify the possibility of success. Rep lA's interpretation of these acts points to another form of uncertainty reduction: The manager's comment "with our skill, we should be number one in the country," suggests an attempt to reduce uncertainty regarding the reps'

488

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

abiiities or self-efficacy (Bandura, 1982). The manager was seen to be clarifsdng that the group iiad the competence needed to be the best. However, this brief speech act appears simultaneousiy to serve important bonding and meaning-maldng functions as weil. The pronouns in the manager's statement that with "our" (rather than "your" or "my") skills "we" (rather than "you" or "I") can be the best communicate his view ofthe group as a unit, a team of people bonded by common goals and abilities. This aitercasts (Weinstein & Deutschberger, 1963) the reps as his equals, as people who are good enough to be an asset to the team's success. This is a high compliment coming from the previous year's second-best performer nationally and serves both to bond the group and to create new meanings, especially meanings related to their personal, professional and group identities. This identity-management function is reflected in a comment by Rep lB: "It was kind of motivating - if I reached the percent of goal to go to Jamaica, that would mean I'm one of the best in the country." Note that he frames the "prize" of the trip to Jamaica - the intended motivator - as having value because of what it says about his identity. Note aiso how the reps' interpretations of the manager's communicative acts seem to reflect the manager's identity as weil. That is, the manager pointed to his previous successes as a reason the reps would listen to and respect him, and he simultaneously altercasted the reps as equals, as just as good as he: "They respected what I said. They knew it couid be done. I did weil so they can do weli, too." He suggested a persona for himseif as being iike them, not a uniqueiy taiented individual whose feats they couid not hope to match. Thus, this manager's attempts to motivate by sharing stories can be seen to serve ali three of the functions suggested by MLT. Furthermore, a single act can be seen to integrate - rather than select or separate multiple communication goals; while functioning instrumentaliy to reduce uncertainty, the act aiso functions reiationaiiy to bond and functions to create positive identities for both himseif and the reps. The attempts were apparentiy successfui, judging both by the group's performance and by the reps' positive evaiuations. Using Jabiin's (Jabiin et al., 1994; Jablin & Sias, in press) model of communication competence, the manager can be seen to have unique resources upon which to draw in performing his stories. That is, having been a top sales performer provided his story performance with a measure of credibility not available as a resource to most managers. Jabiin's model also points to the shared culture ofthe group and organization as an influence on attributions of competence. Team 1 developed a strong culture (Deal & Kennedy, 1982), since all but the outsider were Mends prior to working for UD together, ali members ofthe same fraternity at the same prestigious university. They shared vaiues and

Motivating Coifege Safes Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

489

assumptions that included competing with and encouraging each other, striving to excel and exceed sales goals, and a helief in their own potential. This group culture was a good match for Manager i's motivational communication performances, and no doubt contributed to the reps' attributions of competence to these performances.
Case Study 2: Motivating "Survivors"

Tteam 2 faced a number of challenges. The team manager had little experience with UD, the team had one of the highest sales goals in the country, and all but one of the members were inexperienced and insecure in their ability to sell. In addition, two members of the team left before the selling period was completed. One member (Rep 2C) was older and very experienced in sales and by his own account did not consider himself part of the team. He was on a special contract with a separate territory and was therefore only loosely affiliated with Tbam 2. The Local Sales Director (Manager 7) worked extensively with this team, along with the team manager (Manager 2). Ia spite of these difficulties. Team 2 met its sales goa'ls. We interviewed two of the novice salespeople, the older salesperson, the team manager (Manager 2), and the Local Sales Director (Manager 7). Like the members of Team 1, they described the managers' using a variety of motivational communication strategies, but with some notable differences. Like those from Tfeam 1, these managers used Modeling Success extensively, especially Double Ifeaming; unlike Team i's manager, however, they used this strategy not only early in the selling period, but throughout. Additionally, Team 2 managers used Individualized Attention throughout the selling period. The inexperienced reps, not surprisingly, were frustrated at times, which made Individualized Attention through Supporting and F*roblem Solving essential. Rep 2A described how the two managers used these strategies:
[Manager 7] said we could come to her and say, "This job sucks." I did that one time. I didn't feel bad about it because she said we could. R:om that she knew we were frustrated and she'd sit down with me and say, "Okay, what can w6 do? Okay, work on closing the sale." Without that extra pvish, I could not have kept going out there ready to take on people. ^Manager 2] was the same way - we saw him everyday. He'd say, "If you're having problems, let me know." Or he'd say, "Hang in there." That helped. (Rep 2A)

Both managers' descriptions of their motivational attempts generally converged with the inexperienced reps' descriptions. Manager 2 repeatedly described Individualized Attention as his primary strategy: "I tried to get to know each individual and give them what they need." Later he added, "I try tofindout what's important to each individual and approach them that way." Similarly, Manager 7 described

490

The Journai of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

the use of Individualized Attention in her generai approach: "I try to puii individuais [who are having probiems] aside and taik just oneon-one. . . . I ask them what's up, what are their concerns, how they're feeiing about the j o b . . . . Then you give them certain steps to correct the probiem." This individuaiized strategy may be one reason Rep 2B and Manager 2 were the oniy participants to mention Breaking Down Sales Goals, one ofthe minor themes. (See Rep 2B's quote in Tabie 2.) In this case Manager 2 seems to have designed a motivationai strategy for the specific needs of Rep 2B. Both the inexperienced reps and Manager 7 described the use of Doubie Teaming as a motivationai strategy. Whiie the reps expiained that Manager 2 aiso used Double Teaming, most of their discussion of this strategy centered around Manager 7 since Manager 2, in addition to iiis manageriai responsibiiities, aiso had to sell. In Double Tfeaming, the managers made sales presentations to show reps how they could or should be seiiing. Managers aiso watched reps make saies presentations and gave them positive feedback and suggestions of how to improve. Thus, Doubie Teaming combined ieading by exampie and giving feedback. The two inexperienced reps from Team 2 took particuiar notice of and appreciated their managers' attempts to motivate them by Double Teaming. Rep 2B described the importance of this, even late in the selling period: "It was helpfui to see another person's styie .. . I was getting too routine. So then having different phrases in how to present freshens it." Rep 2A expiained her response to Doubie Teaming, again weii into the seiiing period:
[When double teaming], sometimes [Manager 7] would sell and you would watch other times you'd sell and they'd give you feedback in a helpful way like maybe you should do it like this and I would and it worked! One time there was a double teaming contest to see who could sell the most before noon. The contest was great only because it gave me the opportunity to see how it should be done because I was with [Manager 7] who I consider a pro. I watched her and thought, "Oh, that's how she [sold so much] - why didn't I do it like that all summer?" I wish she had gone with me earlier - I couldn't believe how many places we hit before noon. She knows what she is doing - she means business - she won't stop until she feels positive about something no wonder she sold $50,000. [She] showed me how it should be done - 1 kept that in mind the rest ofthe time It was all fun while effective. (Rep 2A)

While it is difficult to point to specific messages as examples of integrating goals, the reps' descriptions of Double Teaming suggest that it presented an opportunity for addressing muitipie goals through at least a separating, and possibly an integrating, strategy. For example, notice that Rep 2A did not mention that she was motivated by the competition of the saies contest or the prizes, but by the opportunity to receive her manager's feedback and view her manager's model

Motivating College Sales Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

491

sales presentations so that she could improve her own performance. Sep 2B also stated that Manager 7's model sales presentation gave him ideas for improvement. Uncertainty reduction is highlighted in their descriptions, in that the uncertainty of how to sell and what strategies would work was reduced. Simultaneously, the reps were developing new schemata for how to sell, for what was possible (e.g., "I couldn't believe how many places we hit"), and for the manager's identity (e.g., "no wonder she sold $50,000"). Not as obvious are the implications for the reps' identity. However, it is apparent that these reps identified with the managers and likely saw themselves in a new light as the Double Ifeaming experience shaped their views of the managers. Bonding is also apparent in the comment "It was all fun," and perhaps even more so in the reps' quotes above describing Individualized Attention; Individualized Attention was often used in the process of Double Teaming. Unlike Team 1, the inexperienced members of Tfeam 2 did not share the assumption that they were or could be the best, nor did they seem to thrive on competition with each other. Rather, they seemed to share assumptions that selling was complex and difficult and that they were beginners who simply hoped to survive and be adequate to the task. These shared values and assumptions led them to judge the managers' teaching by example and personalized attention as competent motivational communication. In terms of our alternative model of motivational communication, these two managers' approaches were a good "fit" for the group culture of Team 2. Our model, borrowingfromJablin et al. (1994; Jablin & Sias, in press) aiso emphasizes the importance of the manager's communicative resources. These two managers brought ample resources to the communicative task. Both managers had been successful sales reps, especially Manager 7, whose accomplishments were mentioned by Rep 2A ("No wonder she sold $50,000"). She was also able to communicate effectively for audiences that included customers and sales reps -- a rnuch more complex communicative task than simply performing for one or the other. Manager 2 was relatively inexperienced for a manager yet still had demonstrated considerable skill as a salesperson. For example, Rep 2B observed of Manager 2, "When he was successful, when he would come back having sold $2000 . .. seeing him succeed motivated me, showed me you could do it." Also important as a resource was the ability to convey sincere caring and concern for the reps. Providing Individualized Attention was very prominent in Manager 2's interview, as he described his primary motivational strategy as getting "to know each individual and giving them what they need." Implementing such a strategy successfully demanded that the manager be able to establish a rapport with the

492

The Journal of Business Communication 35:4 Oaober 1998

reps. Furthermore, the inexperience and insecurity of these reps required tbe managers to be able to establish themselves as trusted, caring confidantes. The two inexperienced reps described both managers in these terms. Rep 2A said, "It was encouraging because they cared how we did the job. It was genuine, not just because they wanted us to do well for the company." Both reps mentioned several examples of how the managers helped them with personal and jobrelated problems. Thus, these managers were clearly evaluated as competent by the inexperienced reps in Team 2. Yet competent motivational communication took a very different form than for Team l. Uncertainty reducing communication was important for Team i at the beginning, then much less so as they gained confidence and experience. For Tfeam 2, however, uncertainty reduction was important throughout the selling period, and was accomplished through Double Tbaming and the Individualized Attention strategies of Problem Solving and Encouraging. These strategies also allowed Team 2 managers to simultaneously and continually develop and afiirm positive relationships and identities, communication functions that were necessary to bolster the confidence and security - and thus the motivation - of Team 2. The managers' and inexperienced reps' interpretations generally converged in Team 2. However, the accoimt given by Rep 2C - the older, more experienced sales rep - diverged considerably from that given by the managers and the inexperienced reps. Rather than exploring these differences, however, we will explore diverging perspectives in a third case study, that of Team 3.
Case Study 3: Demotivating Communication

Team 3, like Team 1, included several top performing sales people who were friends from the same university prior to working for UD. Also similar to Team l, these friends were motivated by friendly competition with each other. Here the similarities end. Unlike Manager 1, the manager for Team 3 was not a friend of group members prior to leading tbem, and he was uniformly considered incompetent by the three reps we interviewed. While their reasons for judging him negatively were many, they judged many of his motivational communication attempts as contrived, as simply borrowed from UD manager training manuals, and ultimately as beneath them. Rep 3B explained:
Yeah, [he] gave logistical support - here's the facts, here's where you are, here's where you need to be - eversrthing they teach him to tell us. Those of us reaching above goal knew this already - this was not motivating.... He reiterated what we already knew. Manager training gave him stories to tell us - he would have contrived storiesfromsales manager training - this was way below where we were - it was a cheesy waste of time.

Motivating College Sales Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

493

The reps and the manager described the manager as using Modeiiag Success, especiaiiy Double Teaming, as a motivational communication strategy. Manager 3 said, "I led by example. TTiat was my private motto. What I expected them to do, I'd d o . . . . Double teaming was the best they got from me going out and adding my successfui techniques to theirs and seeing my success." The reps also mentioned 3A said, "He had a few good motivating things. He'd double team with us for a long time, even if we didn't need it." However, as suggested by the phi-ase "even if we didn't need it," the reps saw this manager's Doable Teaming as often inappropriate. Rep 3A said, "The first couple of weeks it's necessary. It totally helps As time went on - three weeks into it -^ if he asked me to go out, I'd say no. I was comfortable by then." The problem was not necessarily that Double Tfeaming was only useful in the beginning. Rather, the reps seemed to think Manager 3 had the resources to help them with basics but littie else. For example. Rep gB described a regional manager's Doubie Tfeaming and Pointing to the Future as motivating, even though this occurred very late in the seiiing period: "[HeJ was more motivating. He came out and double teamed with us. Tklked to us about getting a manager position, jobs, and recommendations." Rep 3A likewise mentioned the regional manager's Double Teaming as motivating. Furthermore, Manager 3's behavior with customers while Double Teaming (as weil as at other times) was considered inappropriate and even embarrassing to the reps at times. Rep 3B explained:
He had a bad habit. Every single time we'd go into a business, he was pilfering through the candy jar, grubbing on food. People would get mad because he's eating their food. You can laugh at it, but when you're trying to sell someone it was a joke with him. He'd [take a bag of candy off the shelf and] say, "Here's a bag of candy. Eat this on the way."

The reps and the manager described the manager's attempts to bond with the group through Exuding Energy/Having Fun, using ali three of the subthemes. Manager 3 explained his perspective: "I was their friend, their buddy. We'd grab a beer together.... The fact that we were ali buddies and had a good time together - we didn't want to let each other down." He also mentioned his use of a wooden rhinoceros statue, which was a weii known UD symboi for the hard-charging, toughskinned salesperson: "We'd pass it around and have a prayer to it, do a rhino charge and rhino roar. It got them pumped and charged, and brought comedy to it in the morning." The reps also mentioned the manager's performing the theme of Exuding Energy/Having Fun, but most of their evaluations of these performances were negative. Rep 3C said, "He wasn't our friend ever realiy. He wanted to be able to yeli at

494

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

US, then go out with us." Rep 2A added: "The rhino charge thing . . . at first it was fun, but later, it was like, 'Oh, are we doing this again?'.... He also tried to motivate us as a sports team - like we're jocks.. . . [doing a cheer like] 'UD! UD! UD!' It really didn't work." So, the manager in this team uses all three types of speech acts in MLT. His use of uncertainty reduction is most apparent in his Double Teaming to demonstrate tecbniques of selling. His use of bonding and meaning making acts is obvious in his attempts at Exuding Energy/ Having Fun. However, while he uses all three types of speech acts, which according to MLT is the key to successful motivational communication, he was not considered competent by tbe team. Tbe theoretical framework from which we are operating points to two reasons. First, rather than integrating instrumental, relational, and identity goals, he uses strategies of selecting and separating them. Second, the pre-established group culture of the reps who were already friends was not a good match for the communicative performances of the manager. Rep 3C's comment that "He wanted to be able to yell at us, then go out with us" is a good example of the manager's managing communication goals through a strategy of selection. He attempted to motivate team members to work hard by reprimanding tbem if be perceived tbem not putting forth effort. As Manager 3 said, "I consider myself an authoritarian type of leader.... The whip would come down if they slacked off." At other times, the manager would use Having Social Fun or Providing Constant Friendship. Yet, as Rep 3C's evaluation suggests, the inability to integrate his instrumental goals of directing and motivating them to work hard and his relational goal of bonding led the reps to perceive him as ineffective at both. They considered his attempts at relational bonding insincere (Rep 3C said "His goals were to make money, period") and insecure (Rep 3A said "His whole manner was to find out if we approved of him"). And, they considered his attempts at making work meaningful as "a cheesy waste of time" (Rep 3B). Certainly tbe various levels of communication competence interacted to produce these results. The three friends, while initially inexperienced at sales, quickly became confident and competent in sales communication. Furthermore, they took very professional attitudes toward tbe jobs, intending to make money and belp their careers by the experience. Therefore, when they had done their homework and "knew the numbers," the manager's attempts to motivate them by providing sales information was seen as incompetent, as "way below where we were." His inability to teach them anything new through Double Tbaming after the first few weeks further damaged his credibility in their eyes. He was essentially attempting to reduce uncertainty wbere certainty existed. And, bis attempts to act like a friend after yelling at them was considered inappropriate by their values. Oddly enough.

Motivating Coiiege Sales Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

495

this manager had substantial experience as a UD manager, which would seem to be an important competence resource. However, he was apparently unable to use this resource to create an impression of a skilled, knowledgeable saies manager.

Conclusions
Cusella (1987) quotes McGuire (1973) in arguing for the need to embrace complexity in understanding motivation: "to demand simplicity condemns one to an inadequate theory" (p. 225). This admonition seems appropriate in considering motivational communication as weii, particularly in considering the problems with Motivational Language Tlieory (Suiiivan, 1988). MLT seemed to capture the flavor of many of the kinds of motivational speech acts UD managers performed. Many managerial messages seemed intended to: reduce uncertainty about the nature ofthe job, sales goals, rewards, or saies reps' abiiity; create shared meaning for organizational vaiues and beliefs, such as a hard work ethic; or foster human bonding with reps and affirm their self-worth. However, what is missing from MLT is an appreciation for the integiration of these various types of speech acts. The goals-hased perspective we advocate highlights that symbolic acts have implications for multipie communicative functions. Thus, a single speech act often is intended to accomplish and/or may be perceived as accomplishing instrumental, relational, and identity goals, among others. Furthermore, the abiiity to integrate multipie goals into speech acts - that is, the ability to resolve the conflicting tensions often seen to exist among communicative goals - is an important developmental accomplishment and is likely to be more effective over a wide range of situations than will selection or separation strategies. MLT, with its focus on discrete categories of speech acts rather than goals, fails to recognize the power of multifunctional, integrative communication. All ofthe managers used motivational speech act t3?pes in some combination. For example, managers who used Individualized Attention seemed to present both uncertainty reducing messages to solve problems and self-affirming messages to give reps encouragement. This supports MLT's ciaim that greater motivation results from using more than one speech act. However, even the manager considered incompetent by his team used multipie kinds of speech acts. Thus, simpiy using all three types posited by MLT is inadequate to produce competent motivational communication. The importance of context, and particuiariy the notion of multipie, mutualiy influencing levels of communication competence, is aiso highlighted here. The manager who was perceived as incompetent provides a good exampie. He was the most experienced ofthe three Ter-

496

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

ritory Sales Managers, having been with UD forfivesummers. Since he had been rehired each of the pastfivesummers, he must have been perceived by someone at UD to be a skilled manager. Additionally, he and several from his team won the trip to Jamaica reserved for top performing individuals (although the reps argued that this occurred in spite of, not because of, his management). This team, however, judged him as incompetent at motivational communication, apparently because the communicative choices he made were incongruent with the group's shared understandings of appropriate and effective communication. Thus, this study, while exploratory, suggests several implications for the practice of motivational communication. First, as MLT (Sullivan, 1988) suggests, managers should develop and use a varied repertoire of motivational communication strategies, and not, as other motivational theories imply, focus solely on processes of uncertainty reduction. Second, managers must be aware that any communicative act potentially has multiple functions, multiple implications, and multiple interpretations, and that the meaning(s) of motivational communication attempts must be negotiated and not assumed. This is essentially a call for an appreciation of the complexity of communication; as ample research shows, complex thinking about communication and social phenomena is an important resource for managers (and others) in organizations (Sypher & Zorn, 1986; Haas & Sypher, 1991; Zorn & Violanti, 1996). Finally, motivational communication strategies cannot be considered in isolation, but must be considered in light of the context, or culture, in which they are used. Managers must assess and be sensitive to the norms, beliefs, and assumptions within the group and assess what this implies about standards for communication competence. Then, they must adapt their motivational communication strategies accordingly. These implications for practice suggest parallel implications for research. First, is Sullivan (1988) suggested, motivation theorists need to expand the range of communicative acts addressed by their theories. Second, theories of business communication must recognize the limitations of taxonomies of communication strategies, since such an approach is an inherent oversimplification of the communication process (see Kellerman & Cole, 1994, and O'Keefe, 1994, for critiques of strategy taxonomy approaches). Taxonomies are indeed useful for indicating the range of speech act tnJes or strategy types used. However, the taxonomy provides only a description of the kinds of strategies managers use. To explain motivational communication more fully, we must go beyond taxonomies to theories addressing the ambiguity and multiple meanings possible in communicative acts. Finally, this study shows the value of studying business communication

Motivating College Sales Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

497

processes in context. Through assessing multiple perspectives on motivational communication attempts within particular contexts, a rich appreciation of these processes emerges; motivational coinamu nication attempts have no inherent meaning, but are meaningful within a particular context and from a particular perspective. The members of this organization differ from those of members of other sales organizations in at least three ways: (a) both the sales managers and sales reps were quite young; (b) most sales reps were inexperienced; and (c) the sales reps were employed for a very short period of time. These characteristics could explain certain problems and practices within the organization's culture. For example, the important role offriendshipsin the first and third cases, and especially the tension between managers and their subordinates in negotiating friendships, may have been prevalent due to the age group of the sales staff and the somewhat unusual circumstances of living away from home together, often in shared living arrangements. Also, the practice of motivating through having fun at bars or parties seemed to be characteristic of a youBg age group as well. An organizational culture whose members possess different characteristics may have different problems and practices. That, of course, must remain to be seen in future research.
NOTES

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1996 meeting of the Speech Communication Association in San Diego. It is based on the second author's Master's thesis, directed by thefirstauthor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Theodore E. Zom is Professor and Department Chair of Management Communication at the Universily of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. Sarah Ruccio is a TVaining Coordinator for Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) in Nashville, TN, USA. Send correspondence to Theodore E. Zorn, Department of Management Communication, University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand <tzorn@waikato.ac.nz> ilEFERENCES Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental socialpsychology(yol. 2, pp. 267-300). New York: Academic Press. Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. Bandura, A. (1982, February). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 3f, 122-147. Barge, J. K. (1994). Leadership: Communication skills for organizations and groups. New York: St. Martin's. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press. Clark, R. A., & Delia, J. G. (1979, April). Topoi and rhetorical competence. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 6g, 187-206. Coulihard, M. (1977). An introduction to discourse analysis. Essex, UK: Longman.

498

The Journal of Business Communication

35:4 October 1998

Cusella, L. P (1987). Feedback, motivation, and performance. In F. M. Jablin, L. Putnam, K. Roberts, & L. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: An interdisciplinary perspective, (pp. 624-678). Newbury Park: Sage. Dalrymple, D. J. (1988). Sales management: Concepts and cases (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley. Deal, T., & Kennedy, A. (1982). Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Fairhurst, G. T. (In press). Dualisms in leadership communication research. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Frey, L. R., Botan, C. H., Friedman, P, G., & Kreps, G. L. (Eds.). (1991). Investigating communication: An introduction to research methods. Englewood ClifFs: Prentice Hall. Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory. Berkeley: University of California Press. Haas, J., & Sypher, B. D. (1991). Communication-related abilities and individual success in organizations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Atlanta, GA. House, R. J. (1971, September). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, 321-338. House, R. J. (1996). Path goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated theory. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 323-352. Jablin, F. M., & Krone, K. J. (1994). Task/work relationships: A life-span perspective. In G. Miller & M. Knapp (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 621-675). Beverly Hill, CA: Sage. Jablin, F. M., Cude, R. L., House, A., Lee, J., & Roth, N. L. (1994). Communication competence in organizations: Conceptualization and comparison across multiple levels of analysis. In L. Thayer & G. Barnett (Eds.), Organization-communication: Emerging perspectives (Vol. 4, pp. 114-140). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Jablin, F. M., & Sias, P. M. (In press). Communication competence. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Kellerman, K, & Cole, T. (1994, February). Classifying compliance-gaining messages: Taxonomic disorder and strategic confusion. Communication Theory, 4, 3-60. Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. Z. (1987). The leadership challenge: How to get extraordinary things done in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Mayfield, J., Mayfield, M., & Kopf, J. (1995, October). Motivating language: Exploring theory with scale development. The Journal of Business Communication, 32(4), 329-344McGuire, W. J. (1973). Persuasion, resistance, and attitude change. In I. O. Poole, F. W. Frey, W. Schxamm, N. Maccoby, & E. Parker (Eds.), Handbook of communication (pp. 216-252). Chicago: Rand McNally. McPhee, R. D. (1985). Formed structure and organizational communication. In R. McPhee & P. K. Tompkins (Eds.), Organizational communication: Traditional themes and new directions (pp. 149-178). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Motivating Cofiege Saies Teams / Zorn, Ruccio

499

O'Keefe, B. J., & Delia, J. G. (1982). Impression formation and message production. In M. E. Roloff & C. R. Berger (Eds.), Social cognition and communication (pp. 33-72). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. O'Keefe, D. J. (1994). Compliance gaining: Prom strategy-based to feature-based analyses of compliance-gaining message classification and production. Communication Theory, 4, 61-69. Owen, W. F. (1984). Interpretive themes in relational communication. Quarterly Journalof Speech, 70, 2q4-28% Kke, K. L. (1967). Language in relation to a unified theory ofthe structure of human behavior. The Hague: Mouton. Prus, R. C. (1989). Making .sales: Influence as interpersonal accomplishment. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Putnam, L. L. (1983). The interpretive perspective: An alternate to functionalism. In L. L. Putnam & M. E. Pacanowsky (Eds.), Communication and organizations: An interpretive approach (pp. 31-53). Beverly Hills: Sage. Bost, J. C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. New York: Praeger. Seibold, D., Cantrill, & Meyers, K. (1985). Interpersonal influence. In G. Miller & M. Knapp (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 551-611). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Steers, R. M., & Pbrter, L. W. (Eds.). (1991). Motivation and work behavior (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Sullivan, J. J. (1988). Three roles of language in motivation theory. Academy of Management Review, J3, 104-115. Sypher, B. D., & Zorn, T. E. (1986). Communication related abilities and upward mobility: A longitudinal investigation. Human Communication Research, 12, 420-431. Tompkins, P. K. (1994). Principles of rigor for assessing evidence in "qualitative" communication research. Western Journal of Communication, g8, 44-50. Trujillo, N. (1992). Interpreting (tbe work and talk of) baseball: Perspectives on ballpark culture. Western Journal of Communication, 56, 350-371. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley. Weick, K. (1987). Communication: An interdisciplinary perspective. In E Jablin, L. Putnam, K. Roberts, & L. Porter (Eds.) Handbook of organizational communication: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 97-122). Newbtary Park: Sage. Weinstein, E. A., &. Deutschberger, P. (1963). Some dimensions of altercasting. Sociometry, 26, 454-466. Wood, J. T., Dendy, L. L., Dordek, E., Germany, M., & Varallo, S. (1994). The dialectic of difference: A thematic analysis of intimates' meanings for difFerences. In K. Carter & M. Presnell (Eds.), Interpretive approaches to interpersonal communication (pp. 115-136). New York: SUNY Press. Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Zorn, T. E. (1993). Motivation to communicate: A critical review with suggested alternatives. Communication Yearbook, 16, 515-549. Zorn, T. E., & Leichty, G. B. (1991). Leadership and identity: A reinterpretation of situational leadership theory. Southern Communication Joumal, g6, u-24. Zorn, T. E., & Violanti, M. (1996). Communication abilities and individual achieve; ment in organizations. Management Communication Quarterly, 10, 139-167.

You might also like