Role Ambiguity, Role Conflict, and Performance: Empirical Evidence of an Inverted-U Relationship

The traditional view of the relationship between role stressors (role ambiguity and role confict) and performance is contrasted with a perspective that has received relatively little attention. Some sales force scholars have suggested that the relationship between role stressors and job outcomes mig...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Journal of personal selling & sales management Vol. 28; no. 3; pp. 299 - 313
Main Author Onyemah, Vincent
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Abingdon Routledge 01.06.2008
M. E. Sharpe
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Subjects
Ambiguity
Impact analysis
International
Job performance
Job stress
Marketing
Modeling
Personal selling
Research Note
Role conflict
Sales management
Sales personnel
Sales quotas
Salespeople
Stress
Studies
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The traditional view of the relationship between role stressors (role ambiguity and role confict) and performance is contrasted with a perspective that has received relatively little attention. Some sales force scholars have suggested that the relationship between role stressors and job outcomes might mirror the inverted-U relationship between actual felt stress and performance (e.g., Yerkes-Dodson's law, activation theory). The empirical evidence they reported is inconclusive: the hypothesis with respect to performance is not supported. Nevertheless, many sales force management textbooks maintain that an inverted-U relationship exists. Based on a survey of 1,290 salespeople, the present research demonstrates that an inverted-U relationship, similar to that posited by Yerkes-Dodson's law, is indeed plausible. Furthermore, this relationship appears to be moderated by organizational tenure and proactive tendencies.
ISSN:0885-3134
1557-7813
DOI:10.2753/PSS0885-3134280306