Is There a Dark Side of Ambidexterity? Implications of Dueling Sales and Service Orientations

Journal of Service Research - Tập 20 Số 4 - Trang 379-392 - 2017
Colin B. Gabler1, Jessica Ogilvie1, Adam Rapp1, Daniel G. Bachrach2
1Department of Marketing, College of Business, Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA
2Department of Management and Marketing, Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA

Tóm tắt

This study examines how employee customer and selling orientations, and their interaction, impact frontline employees’ (FLEs) pursuit of service and sales-related performance outcomes. Applying a job demands-resources lens, we advance a model that explores service-sales ambidexterity at the individual level. Polynomial regression and response surface analysis are used to assess how varying levels of customer and selling orientation relate to FLE outcomes. Our findings indicate that commitment to service quality and sales performance are highest when employees are singularly focused on one or the other. However, when required to be ambidextrous—that is, when employees must maintain a dual focus—these outcomes begin to suffer as employees are unclear of their role in the organization. While ambidextrous employees experience role conflict, they are also more likely to use creativity in their selling activities. These positive and negative consequences of ambidexterity underscore both the potential risks and rewards of a dual orientation on the front line.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1080/08853134.2016.1272053

10.1177/1094670513506494

10.1007/s11747-006-0013-1

10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357

10.1177/002224298705100407

10.1177/002224377701400320

10.1002/9781118539415.wbwell019

10.1108/02683940710733115

10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.274

10.1002/hrm.20004

10.2307/2228949

10.5465/amr.2007.26585791

10.1080/10696679.2001.11501893

10.1177/1094670513491633

10.1509/jmkg.65.3.34.18334

10.1287/orsc.1090.0426

10.1177/002224299606000108

10.1177/002224378502200201

10.1037/a0019364

10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499

Edwards Jeffrey R., 2002, Advances in Measurement and Data Analysis, 350

10.1177/014920639402000311

10.1177/109467059921004

10.1080/08853134.2014.899471

10.2753/PSS0885-3134310305

10.1177/1094670505279699

10.1177/0092070304267927

10.1177/002224299606000406

10.1016/S0301-0511(96)05223-4

10.1509/jm.75.2.55

10.1509/jmkg.66.4.86.18511

10.1016/0030-5073(72)90030-X

10.1108/09564230810891905

10.1016/0749-5978(85)90020-2

10.1509/jm.10.0448

Jones Eli, 2005, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 25, 105

10.1509/jmkg.72.5.050

10.2307/20159559

10.1177/0886368715581959

10.1177/0149206308318611

Panagopoulos Nikolaos G., Journal of Marketing

10.1177/0018726707076684

10.1080/09585199700000041

10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

10.1037/a0031733

10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.02.003

10.2307/2391486

10.1177/002224378201900307

10.1037/a0014945

10.1177/109467059800100108

10.1177/1094670504273966

Schwepker Charles H., 2003, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 23, 151

10.1007/s10869-010-9183-4

10.1177/002224299405800303

10.1177/014920630002600104

10.1002/job.127

10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00483-6

10.1037/1072-5245.14.2.121

10.1177/1094670512453878