Exploring collaboration betweensales and marketing

Ken Le Meunier-FitzHughSchool of Management and Organisational Psychology,

Birkbeck University of London, London, UK, and

Nigel F. PiercyWarwick Business School, The University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

Abstract

Purpose – The study seeks to explore the antecedents and implications of collaboration betweensales and marketing and further to identify whether there are benefits in terms of businessperformance of improving collaboration between sales and marketing.

Design/methodology/approach – Three exploratory case studies and a review of the literature areused to examine the antecedents to collaboration between sales and marketing. The case studies allowthis fuzzy and undefined area to be clarified and existing theories to be empirically tested.

Findings – The study identifies that there are three types of factor influencing collaboration betweensales and marketing: integrators, facilitators, and management attitudes towards coordination. Theexploratory case studies establish that senior management plays a pivotal role in creating andimproving collaboration between sales and marketing, and that there is a positive correlation betweencollaboration between sales and marketing, and improved business performance.

Research limitations/implications – The limitations of this study are that it is qualitative innature and the conceptual framework needs be tested through a large-scale survey. In addition, thestudy considers only large UK organisations and, therefore, future research should considerexpanding the study to overseas organisations.

Practical implications – There appears to be an established relationship between the level ofcollaboration between sales and marketing and business performance. Further, the attitude of seniormanagers to improving coordination is critical to influencing collaboration between sales andmarketing.

Originality/value – This study contends that sales and marketing need to collaborate rather thanintegrate and uses exploratory case studies to support the development of the framework.

Keywords Sales, Marketing, Business performance

Paper type Research paper

Significant research efforts have been devoted to considering co-operation andcollaboration between functional departments in organisations, based on the premisethat interdepartmental collaboration is linked to improving business performance.However, relatively little attention has been paid to the interdepartmental relationshipbetween sales and marketing as compared to other functional relationships withmarketing. Kotler et al. (2006, p. 78) state:

Every company can and should improve the relationship between sales and marketing.

Yet this interface exhibits one of the most contentious relationships withinorganisations (Dewsnap and Jobber, 2000; Dawes and Massey, 2005), and is one thatis attracting increasing attention from both practitioners and academics (e.g. Athens,2002; Rouzies et al., 2005; Kotler et al., 2006).

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0309-0566.htm

Sales andmarketing

939

Received May 2006Accepted August 2006

European Journal of MarketingVol. 41 No. 7/8, 2007

pp. 939-955q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0309-0566DOI 10.1108/03090560710752465

One reason for this lack of attention is that organisations and customers habituallysee sales and marketing as a single function; customers do not usually differentiatebetween sales and marketing departments and consider them to perform a singlepurpose (Cespedes, 1993, 1994; Webster, 1997; Yandle and Blythe, 2000). However, inlarge organisations, sales and marketing are frequently structured as separate anddiscrete departments (Piercy, 1986; Workman et al., 1998) and perform differentfunctions (Shapiro, 2002). The role of sales is “to stimulate, rather than satisfy, demandfor products” (Weitz and Bradford, 1999, p. 243), while marketing “will be structuredaround major customers and markets, not products, and will integrate sales, productstrategy, distribution, and marketing communications competencies and activities”(Webster, 1997, p. 64). However, the nature of marketing practice itself varies byorganisation and industry. The type of marketing carried out, and how it is managed,organised and delivered changes as the firm co-evolves with its market place (Murrayand O’Driscoll, 2002; Kotler et al., 2006). Prior studies considering the cross-functionalrelationship between sales and marketing have suggested that this interface exhibitsmany negative characteristics (Dewsnap and Jobber, 2000; Dawes and Massey, 2005;Rouzies et al., 2005; Kotler et al., 2006; Piercy, 2006). There is often poor coordinationbetween sales and marketing, particularly in planning and goal setting (Weitz andBradford, 1999; Olson et al., 2001; Rouzies et al., 2005; Piercy, 2006; Kotler et al., 2006).Lorge (1999, p. 27) notes:

Historically there has been tension between sales and marketing, bred by physical andphilosophical separation and by poor communication.

This tension in the relationship has created the need to ensure that sales and marketingare able to collaborate to the benefit of the organisation.

To allow practitioners and academics to identify how the relationship between salesand marketing in large organisations can be improved, it is necessary to identify thefactors that can be utilised to influence this interface. Although there have been anumber of recent papers conceptualising this relationship, they have been based purelyon literature reviews (e.g. Dewsnap and Jobber, 2000; Rouzies et al., 2005). This studywill use exploratory case studies as well as existing literature to investigate the salesand marketing interface, to identify the possible antecedents of collaboration betweensales and marketing, and to develop a framework that can be tested through aquantitative survey. The study will also seek to identify whether effectivecollaboration between sales and marketing can provide benefits to the organisationin terms of improved business performance.

Conceptual developmentThe term “collaboration” between sales and marketing has been selected for this studybased in Kahn’s (1996) work on R&D and marketing, which indicated that thecollaborative elements of integration, e.g. collective goals, mutual understanding,informal activities, shared resources and esprit de corps have a greater impact onperformance than the interaction component of integration (physical activities andcross-functional training). In addition, the term “integration” indicates a need to createa single function/process and combine the parts into a whole (Oxford University Press,1993). However, combining sales and marketing functions may not be desirable, asthey have necessarily different activities performed by different people who are

EJM41,7/8

940

appropriate for each function (Shapiro, 2002). By contrast, collaboration is defined asworking together (Oxford University Press, 1993) and indicates the need to buildbridges between two culturally different entities with the aims of creatingopportunities for learning and improving functionality to the benefit of businessperformance. The contention is that sales and marketing more often need to collaborateas opposed to integrate.

A number of writers have explored the interface between sales and marketing andsome have conceptualised the relationship (Cespedes, 1993; Dewsnap and Jobber, 2000;Rouzies et al., 2005; Kotler et al., 2006). These researchers have generally foundevidence to suggest that while sales and marketing are both independent andinterdependent, they are not always seen as working collectively or collaboratively(Rosenbloom and Anderson, 1984; Alldredge et al., 1999; Lorge, 1999; Dawes andMassey, 2005; Kotler et al., 2006). Other writers describe the relationship between salesand marketing as exhibiting a lack of understanding, distrust, poor co-operation andbeing in conflict (Anderson, 1996; Strahle et al., 1996; Dewsnap and Jobber, 2000;Rouzies et al., 2005; Kotler et al., 2006).

There are a number of reasons cited for the lack of collaboration between sales andmarketing, including different philosophies and backgrounds (e.g. experience andeducation) (Ruekert and Walker, 1987; Cespedes, 1994; Griffin and Hauser, 1996;Shapiro, 2002; Kotler et al., 2006). Salespeople appear to be intuitive, whilst marketingpeople are more creative, and there is evidence to indicate that they are culturallydifferentiated (Cespedes, 1993). Furthermore, sales and marketing may be set differentgoals by senior management, leading to lack of coordination of activities (Strahle et al.,1996; Colletti and Chonko, 1997; Anderson et al., 1999; Olson et al., 2001). Severalwriters have also highlighted the difficulties created by the short-term orientation ofsales goals conflicting with the long-term orientation of marketing (Montgomery andWebster, 1997; Olson et al., 2001). Lack of collaboration may be aggravated by poorcommunications (Anderson, 1996; Strahle et al., 1996; Lorge, 1999; Kotler et al., 2006),and sales and marketing functions may not exchange information effectively toimprove performance. Senior management may not be focused on establishingcoordination between these two areas (Workman et al., 1998; Piercy, 2006). Some salesand marketing departments may experience role ambiguity and a lack ofunderstanding of each other’s roles (Cespedes, 1993; Kotler et al., 2006). There havealso been examples of sales and marketing teams blaming each other for sales failure(Colletti and Chonko, 1997; Shapiro, 2002).

Tension may be created between the need to retain the distinctiveness of sales andmarketing (because they perform differentiated tasks), while facilitating acollaborative stance (to coordinate efforts around organisational goals) (Shapiro,2002; Piercy, 2006). It has been suggested that under some circumstances, conflictbetween groups, like sales and marketing, can be beneficial if it is associated withimproved performance (Barclay, 1991; Montgomery and Webster, 1997). There is alsodanger in creating excess emphasis on increasing inter-group interaction – the resultmay be to overburden personnel with meetings and information (Kahn, 1996; Labiancaet al., 1998) and a number of writers have warned that increasing communicationbetween groups may be detrimental to efficiency (Child, 1985; Kahn and Mentzer,1998). Nonetheless, there appears to be some general agreement that the sales andmarketing interface frequently appears to be poorly coordinated and lacking

Sales andmarketing

941

collaboration, and that improvements in this relationship should be beneficial to theorganisation in terms of improved business performance (e.g. Cespedes, 1993;Dewsnap and Jobber, 2000; Rouzies et al., 2005; Kotler et al., 2006). For example,Tjosvold (1988) found that collaboration between departments led to improvedproductivity and competitiveness. Improvements in collaboration, interdepartmentalrelations, and communication quality may enhance the formulation of strategy, as wellas reducing conflict (Menon et al., 1996). Correspondingly, Morgan and Turnell (2003)found that improvement in customer satisfaction leads to improvements in marketperformance. There is some evidence that a strong relationship between the internalcollaboration of functional areas leads to greater customer satisfaction, operationalefficiency and improved business performance.

The extant literature suggests that the relationship between sales and marketingdoes not always operate efficiently or effectively and that their actions are not alwayswell coordinated or collaborative. This lack of collaboration may be caused by lack ofunderstanding of each other’s roles, role ambiguity, poor communication, a culture ofblame, different perspectives and poor alignment of activities and goals. There isconsiderable evidence to indicate that improvements in collaborative behaviourbetween sales and marketing can have benefits in enhanced business performance.

Research studyTo allow the development of a conceptual framework, exploratory case studies wereconducted to clarify the relationship of the various elements influencing collaborationbetween sales and marketing. This approach was relevant because case studies areappropriate when the “theory base is comparatively weak and the environment understudy is messy” (Harrison, 2002, p. 158). The interface between sales and marketing iscomplex, and the literature examining the relationship between sales and marketing islimited. By adopting exploratory case studies, the framework can be developed fromboth existing literature and contextual field data (Parasuraman et al., 2004).

Research sitesThe three organisations studied are a publisher, an industrial manufacturer and apackaged-goods company. These organisations were selected because they haveseparate sales and marketing departments reporting to a single senior manager, andhave a vertical management structure. Under the definition of the UK Companies Act(1985), all the organisations selected can be described as large (The Department ofTrade and Industry, 2004). Piercy (1986) and Workman et al. (1998) found that largeorganisations usually have independent sales and marketing departments. The reasonfor selecting organisations from different industries was to confirm that similarelements were found in a number of contexts.

The basis for these studies was hour-long personal interviews with three members ofstaff in each company – the head of sales, head of marketing, and their line manager(who were all members of the senior management team and whose job titles varieddepending on the type of organisation). Senior managers were selected because theyprovide an overview of the sales and marketing interface and the objectives of theorganisation as a whole. Interviews were carried out with sales managers and marketingmanagers to provide further insights into the relationship. The aim was to gain clearerunderstanding of how far sales and marketing collaborate, what the roles of sales and

EJM41,7/8

942

marketing are within the organisation, whether their targets and objectives are linked,how they are rewarded and monitored, and how senior management regard thisinteraction. All the participants were asked the same questions.

The case studies were analysed through cross-case analyses. Miles and Huberman(1994) identified two reasons for carrying out cross-case analyses:

(1) To enhance generalisability.

(2) To deepen understanding and explanation.

Both of these goals apply to this study. By defining the dimensions of theinterdepartmental relationships between sales and marketing it became possible todevelop the theoretical framework. The aim was to sort the large amounts of data andanalyse them in a replicable way (Harrison, 2002). The data were analysed under theproposed framework headings as recommended by Baker (1997). The benefit of thismethod of analysis was to allow the development of insights into the sales and marketingrelationship from three organisations and to help to clarify the conceptual framework.

Developing the conceptual frameworkThe selection of variables for the conceptual framework was guided by the extantliterature, which identified a number of themes as influencing the relationship betweenthe sales and marketing functions, and was developed through the exploratory casestudies. The variables selected to analyse the data from the exploratory case studieswere: management attitude towards coordination of activities, rewards, conflict ofinterests, frequency of meetings, organisational learning, marketing planning andcross-functional training. However, it was unclear how these variables wouldinterrelate or their relative importance. The literature review further revealed that thecollaboration of marketing with other functional areas appears to contribute toimproved business performance in many organisations.

The framework was refined through the exploratory case studies, which indicatedthat the variables should be categorised into three groups: integrators and facilitators ofcollaboration, and management attitudes towards coordination of activities. Integratorsare those activities that take longer to develop and “cement” the inter-group relationshipthrough changing culture. Integrators are controllable activities that may be used bysenior management to improve the sales and marketing interface. Facilitators areconsidered to be physical mechanisms that can be put in place quickly to provideinteraction and coordination of activities. However, facilitators can be detrimental tocollaboration between sales and marketing if over-employed. They are time consumingand may create greater conflict if they are viewed as obstructive to achievingdepartmental goals. Management attitude towards coordination of activities has becomethe central construct that influences integrators and facilitators, as well as collaborationbetween sales and marketing directly. From the exploratory case studies, it has becomeclear that the direction of the variables in the conceptual framework should proceed fromthe organisational factors influencing coordination to collaboration between sales andmarketing, and then to business performance (see Figure 1).

IntegratorsThe concept of “integrators” includes those factors that should directly influencecollaboration between sales and marketing. The literature review and exploratory case

Sales andmarketing

943

studies highlighted five integrating variables – communication, organisationallearning, marketing information systems, marketing planning and conflict of interests.

CommunicationThe exploratory findings highlighted how interactions promote collaboration, and thateffective internal formal communications (meetings and conferences), and informalcommunications (casual contacts) may be used to develop cohesive strategy atoperational level (to ensure that all activities are coordinated between sales andmarketing) as well as to break down functional silos. Souder (1988) noted that frequentmeetings to discuss joint involvements and to increase the sharing of information aidedin the establishment of collaboration. The publishing marketing manager explained, “wework very closely together and keep each other informed at all times about what is goingon”, and the senior manager said, “communication is good; they know each other’sstrengths and weaknesses”. The industrial manufacturer marketing manager said, “wedo have regular meetings and telephone calls, and the outside sales guys are often here,so there is no shortage of communication”. However, the consumer goods marketingmanager stated, “there were certain things that were going on that nobody knows about,except the person that was doing it”. These non-integrated events provide evidence thatnot all the communication systems were robust within the three organisations.

The publisher and industrial manufacturer evidenced examples of both formal andinformal communications, whilst the consumer goods organisation had to rely oninformal contacts, as meetings were infrequent. This organisation showed the lowestlevels of collaboration between sales and marketing. The literature review and the case

Figure 1.Antecedents andconsequences ofcollaboration betweensales and marketing

EJM41,7/8

944

studies confirm that communications play a key role in aligning sales and marketingactivities. Rouzies et al. (2005) however note that there may be an inverted U-shapedrelationship between communications and collaboration, and indicate that additionalformal communication may overburden the participants, impeding collaboration.However, without robust communication systems, independent activities may developand a silo mentality can become established. It is therefore proposed that:

P1. Effective communication between sales and marketing will have positiveeffects on collaboration between sales and marketing.

Organisational learningAccording to Slater and Narver (1995), the creation of organisational learning shouldinclude information dissemination and the effective sharing of the interpretation of theinformation. The contention is that organisational learning will help to alignparadigms, share good practice and allow flexibility of response to the market place.This provides a more focussed concept than that of organisational culture outlined inRouzies et al. (2005). According to Loermans (2002, p. 290), it is necessary to build acorporate architecture to “facilitate learning at the organisational level to createknowledge sharing and dissemination mechanisms across the organisation”. Thepublishing senior manager said:

There’s a lot to learn from each other as to how we are all dealing with our own customers andhow our customers are reacting to this and [internally] sharing that information.

The publisher displayed strong evidence of organisational learning through thedevelopment of integrative systems and shared knowledge. However, part of learningis sharing knowledge that promotes successful collaboration (Loermans, 2002). Theexploratory research found evidence of tacit learning in all three organisations, withmore explicit learning in the publisher (which was also the most collaborative). Therewas some sharing of good practice in the industrial manufacturer, but sharing of thislearning was not always formalised. The consumer goods organisation displayed littleevidence of learning between the sales and marketing functions, and this organisationwas the least collaborative. Literature and the case studies indicate that a learningorientation is important to establishing collaboration, and there are synergies betweenorganisational learning and other variables. It is proposed that:

P2. A commitment to organisational learning will have positive effects oncollaboration between sales and marketing.

Market intelligenceJaworski and Kohli (1993) identified that the dissemination of market intelligenceacross all departments aids collaboration. In addition, the inclusion of sales into marketintelligence collection and dissemination processes is essential to establishingcollaboration (Cross et al., 2001; Olson et al., 2001; Kotler et al., 2006). The case studiesfound that all three organisations recognised the importance of developing strongmarket intelligence systems, which include the sales force. The industrialmanufacturer senior manager explained:

We all take it as a responsibility to try, where we can, to pick up competitive information. Getit and bring it back in.

Sales andmarketing

945

The publishing senior manager explained that one person was responsible for collatingand disseminating customer information, and said:

He or she can get feedback from the customers, end users, from the sales and marketing team,from his own team. It comes from a variety of points.

In this organisation, the market information is then disseminated back throughregular, cross-functional meetings.

Although Rouzies et al. (2005) notes that information systems may be an antecedentto the integration of sales and marketing, these processes are not as specificallyrelevant to the function of sales and marketing as market intelligence systems. Evansand Schlacter (1985) noted that in many organisations, market information might beavailable, but that their structure and processes may fail to facilitate prompt andmeaningful marketing information exchange. The consumer goods company collectsmarket information from the sales force and it is kept by the managing director, butthere are no established processes for analysing the information and it is not routinelydisseminated between departments. It is this process of disseminating and sharingmarketing information between sales and marketing, which is believed to underpincollaboration between sales and marketing. Therefore, it is proposed:

P3. Collaboration between sales and marketing will be enhanced through marketintelligence systems, e.g. collection, storage and dissemination.

Marketing planningShapiro (1988) and Cespedes (1993) have identified that coordination between sales andmarketing may be enhanced through joint marketing planning at both strategic andtactical levels. In addition, inclusive marketing planning allows staff to own the planand therefore facilitates effective implementation (Piercy, 2002). The exploratory casestudies found that two of the organisations indicated that they understood theimportance of planning in coordinating activities and were implementing newmarketing planning activities and the industrial manufacturer indicated they haverecently undergone a restructure and were focussing on reintegrating the businessfunctions, and planning processes had not yet been re-established. The publishingsenior manager said:

There are regular group meetings between the sales and marketing people, who together willput together plans.

This organisation demonstrated greater collaboration than the other two. Conversely,the consumer goods marketing manager explained that there is no joint marketingplanning within the organisation and even the advertising schedule was made up asthey went along. Planning may be an important part of aligning activities so thatindividuals/departments can collaborate to set targets and understand how theiractivities fit into the overall objectives of the department/organisation, as well asacross functional boundaries. The planning process should improve collaborationbetween sales and marketing and therefore it is proposed:

P4. Joint marketing planning will have a positive effect on collaboration betweensales and marketing.

EJM41,7/8

946

Conflict of interestsThe concept of conflict of interests includes working at cross-purposes, havingincompatible goals, being obstructive and being in conflict with each other. There wasstrong evidence in the literature that collaboration cannot co-exist withinterdepartmental conflict (Ruekert and Walker, 1987; Labianca et al., 1998). Conflictof interests was therefore included in the framework, with the expectation that it wouldhave a negative impact upon collaboration. There are many reasons cited for the lackof co-operation between sales and marketing, including the fact that they have verydifferent philosophies and that staff often have different backgrounds, e.g. educationand experience (Ruekert and Walker, 1987; Cespedes, 1994; Griffin and Hauser, 1996;Lorge, 1999; Kotler et al., 2006). In addition, sales and marketing may have been setdifferent goals by senior management and be working at cross-purposes to each other,which may also be aggravated by poor communications (Anderson, 1996; Strahle et al.,1996; Lorge, 1999). Some sales and marketing departments experience role ambiguityand there may be a lack of understanding of each other’s roles (Cespedes, 1993).

The industrial manufacturer sales manager said:

There were constant complaints that the marketing people who were meant to be seedingopportunities in new markets . . . were coming across or ending up doing a sales job. Therewas quite a lot of conflict.

Even in well-coordinated organisations, lack of role clarity may create conflict. Thepublishing sales manager explained:

You have to [reduce conflict], otherwise it would be trenches across the office and barbedwire.

The consumer goods senior management said:

Yes, I think conflict does exist between sales and marketing at times.

The case studies found that there were examples of conflict of interests between salesand marketing and some evidence of them working against each other. There wassome lack of understanding of each other’s roles and lack of support for each other’sactivities. The proposal is that:

P5. A reduction in conflict of interests will improve collaboration between salesand marketing.

FacilitatorsThe concept of “facilitators” includes those physical mechanisms that may influencethe development of collaboration between sales and marketing as they can quickly beput into place to improve relationships. The literature review identified threefacilitators: cross-functional training, integration mechanisms and rewards.

Cross-functional trainingCohen (1993) indicated that training could help staff to form ties and integrate theiractivities across boundaries. According to Kahn (1996), increased collaborationbetween departments may be facilitated through a range of training methods,including cross-functional training. Training can help staff to understand what isrequired of them (Buchanan and Huczynski, 1997). Training within the three

Sales andmarketing

947

organisations was at best ad hoc, it was not linked to collaborative objectives and therewas little evidence of formal cross-functional training programmes, although all themanagers agreed that training was vital to the development of staff. When asked iftraining was important the publishing senior manager replied:

Yes, it is. We do want to allow people to develop and there is training. Training is notnecessarily regular but it is frequent.

However, some writers found that the majority of sales and marketing staff undertakeindependent training (Cespedes, 1994; Alldredge et al., 1999) and the case studiessupported this view. The literature supported the view that training is an importantpart of developing collaboration, but there was no evidence of structured programmeswithin the organisations studied. It is proposed that:

P6. Cross-functional training between sales and marketing functions maypositively affect collaboration.

Integration mechanismsThe presence of integration mechanisms within an organisation should be indicative ofa high level of collaboration between sales and marketing. Cespedes (1993) indicatedthat the development of structural linkages (e.g. project teams, task forces, job rotation,formal meetings) not only improves coordination, but also signals the importanceplaced on collaboration by senior management. Establishing integration mechanismscan also reduce conflict (Jaworski and Kohli, 1993) and improve collaboration (Kotleret al., 2006). However, Rouzies et al. (2005) indicated that increasing levels of formalcommunication and job rotation might create a U-shaped relationship with sales andmarketing integration. Although none of the organisations studied employed jobrotation between sales and marketing staff, Krohmer et al. (2002) also found that jobrotation of employees could aid the spread of information and good practice across theorganisation. With the exception of the publishing senior manager who had worked inmarketing before being given responsibility for sales, the staff interviewed were eitheron the sales side or in marketing. The consumer goods senior manager said:

You can get a marketing person standing behind the stand at exhibitions just as you can get asales person joining in marketing planning.

However, the study found that the consumer goods organisation demonstrated littleevidence of this occurring. The case studies found that the organisations that were themost collaborative did have some of the structures (joint meetings and steeringcommittees), but none of the organisations encouraged job rotation or cross-functionalteams. The proposal is that:

P7. Collaboration between sales and marketing may be improved throughestablishing integration mechanisms.

RewardsThere has been a traditional split between the types of reward offered to sales staff ascompared to those offered to marketing staff. The proposition is that aligned rewardsshould promote greater collaboration between sales and marketing (e.g. Strahle et al.,1996; Dewsnap and Jobber, 2000; Rouzies et al., 2005; Kotler et al., 2006):

EJM41,7/8

948

Marketing people are rewarded for increasing the profitability of the business and forintroducing new products successfully, while the sales team is told to meet volume targets(Alldredge et al., 1999, p. 120).

The research found that none of the organisations measured or rewarded theirmarketing staff on sales or marketing success of any kind. The publisher has aprofit-based bonus for the sales manager centred on the department’s activities, but thesales representatives are still paid salary and commission. Marketing staff are includedin the company-wide profit-share bonus scheme that is linked to organisationalsuccess, but the scheme excludes the sales staff. The industrial manufacturer has areward system based on sales success, but the marketing staff are paid a straightsalary. Alldredge et al. (1999) established that in many organisations, sales andmarketing are being pulled in two different directions by their reward systems. Theconsumer goods organisation has adopted a salary scheme for both sales andmarketing staff, but the sales staff still have volume targets to achieve. Despite supportfrom literature for using reward systems to improve functional integration (e.g.Dewsnap and Jobber, 2000; Rouzies et al., 2005; Kotler et al., 2006), there is littleevidence from the case studies that it has been employed successfully. Further, theorganisation with the greatest alignment of rewards exhibits the least collaborationbetween sales and marketing. It is therefore proposed that:

P8. Collaboration between sales and marketing may be improved throughalignment of rewards.

Management attitudes towards coordinationWe suggest the construct of management attitudes towards coordination will influenceboth the “integrators” and “facilitators” of collaboration, as well as directly affectingcollaboration between sales and marketing. A positive management attitude towardscoordination will help to develop a culture of sharing will allow compatible goals to beset and joint planning to take place, as well as establishing an esprit de corps, anddeveloping a common vision. These activities should have a direct impact oncollaboration between sales and marketing. In addition, management can facilitatecommunication through formal meetings, set up integrative market informationsystems and marketing planning, and promote organisational learning, therebyinfluencing the “integrators” of sales and marketing collaboration. Further,management can align rewards, establish cross-functional training, and integrationmechanisms, thereby controlling the “facilitators” of collaboration.

Kahn (1996, p. 147) stated that:

Top management should consider programs that encourage departments to achieve goalscollectively, have mutual understanding, work informally together, ascribe to the same visionand share ideas and resources.

However, because marketing strategy requires a long-term perspective and sales targetsare shorter term, many senior managers have difficulty in assessing the trade-offsbetween current, short-term financial performance, and the future, long-term financialperformance (Webster, 1981, 1997). Setting aligned goals for sales and marketing is animportant element in creating collaboration between them (Kotler et al., 2006).

The case studies found that the publisher implemented joint planning sessions withboth marketing and sales managers present. It was observed in the consumer goods

Sales andmarketing

949

organisation that corporate headquarters encouraged integration throughout theorganisation, but that the senior manager interviewed had a rather negative attitudetowards this proposal. In addition, the consumer goods organisation set totallyseparate sales and marketing goals, with sales focusing on short-term targets andmarketing “doing their own thing”. This organisation displayed the least collaborationbetween sales and marketing. The industrial manufacturer had some alignment ofactivities and goals and there was evidence that the senior management were trying toimprove collaboration between groups through setting up a new system for marketintelligence, promoting shared planning and encouraging sales and marketing to worktogether on projects. The publishing organisation demonstrated the most positivesenior management attitude towards coordination, based on frequent communications(formal and informal), joint planning activities and shared information. The publishingsenior manager said:

I try to create a culture of co-operation between marketing and sales.

This organisation was the only one with aligned goals and activities. Creating a cultureof sharing and employing integrators is a key aspect of a positive management attitudetowards coordination. It is proposed that:

P9a. A positive management attitude towards coordination of sales and marketinggoals and activities will improve collaboration between sales and marketing.

P9b. A positive management attitude towards coordination of sales and marketinggoals and activities will positively influence the “integrators” of collaboration.

P9c. A positive management attitude towards coordination of sales and marketinggoals and activities will positively influence the “facilitators” of collaboration.

Business performanceAll interviewees in the case studies agreed that collaboration between sales andmarketing has a positive impact on business performance, and that collaboration is notjust based on close working relationships, but must be supported by aligned goals andintegrative processes. A number of writers (e.g. Kohli and Jaworski, 1990; Narver andSlater, 1990; Krohmer et al., 2002; Morgan and Turnell, 2003) have identified a positivelink between internal collaboration and improved business performance. In addition,Corstjens and Corstjens (1999) indicate that a lack of co-operation between sales andmarketing has the potential to damage the overall success of the organisation. Poorcollaboration between sales and marketing may have a detrimental effect uponbusiness performance, whilst effective collaboration should improve businessperformance. Each organisation was asked about their business performance interms of profit margin and market share. The publisher was the most collaborativeorganisation and also achieved the highest margins in terms of their industry normand had a healthy market share, whereas the consumer goods organisation exhibitedthe least collaboration between sales and marketing had the lowest gross profit (wellbelow the industry norm) and a falling market share. Although these measurements ofbusiness success cannot be attributed solely to sales and marketing collaboration, itdoes indicate a positive association between collaborative behaviour between sales andmarketing, and business performance. Therefore, it is proposed that:

EJM41,7/8

950

P10. Improvements in collaboration between sales and marketing will positivelyinfluence business performance.

Discussion and conclusionsThe study has identified nine antecedents to collaboration between sales and marketingand indicated that eight of these antecedents may be grouped into those that need to bedeveloped over the longer term (integrators) and those that may assist in improvingcollaboration (facilitators). The most significant antecedent was management attitudestowards coordination, as senior manager’s attitudes not only affect collaborationbetween sales and marketing, but also influence the integrators and facilitators. There isan implication for senior managers that, without their support, collaboration betweensales and marketing may not be capable of being improved (a conclusion supported byliterature and evidence from the consumer goods organisation).

The exploratory case studies found that sales and marketing staff frequently workclosely together and sometimes believe that they are working collaboratively.However, there was evidence to suggest that the sales and marketing staff did notalways understand each other’s contribution to the organisation’s overall aims. Salesstaff were frequently excluded from marketing planning activities and often theirshort-term goals forced them to focus on objectives that conflicted with those ofmarketing. Therefore, even if sales and marketing staff are working closely togetherand have good informal communication, they may not be working collaboratively.

The insights from practitioners have given a different framing of the sales andmarketing interface from those developed by Dewsnap and Jobber (2000) and Rouzieset al. (2005). The study found that there was very limited support for the propositionthat aligned rewards will improve collaboration between sales and marketing, sincesales and marketing staff accept that there will be a difference in their rewards. Someshort-term benefits may be accrued from aligned rewards as part of a programme ofimproving collaboration, but this needs further investigation. Additionally, althoughall three organisations had the same structure with separate sales and marketingdepartments, they experienced differing levels of collaboration, indicating thatstructure may not be a key element of collaboration. Finally, the study supports thecontention that the attitude of senior management is important in improving the salesand marketing interface (Dewsnap and Jobber, 2000; Kotler et al., 2006), but this studydemonstrates the central role this factor plays. Further, we support the concept ofintegrators as outlined by Rouzies et al. (2005), but believe that it is a role that should beplayed by senior managers rather than staff members. The study also highlights theimportance of reducing conflict of interests when aiming to improve collaborationbetween sales and marketing. As this study has focussed on the internal relationship ofestablishing collaboration between sales and marketing, rather than the concept ofintegration favoured by the other studies, the external elements have not beenconsidered. This study provides a new framework (see Figure 1) that has beendeveloped with data from practitioners as well as through a literature review.

The least collaborative organisation (consumer goods) was found to have poorformal communications, a poor management attitude towards coordination, littlelearning, no market intelligence system and a high level of conflict of interests. Neitherdid they employ any of the facilitators of collaboration. The most collaborativeorganisation (publisher) exhibited a positive management attitude towards

Sales andmarketing

951

coordination, good communication, shared goals, joint marketing planning, had lowlevels of conflict and employed some integration mechanisms. The third organisation(industrial manufacturer) demonstrated a reasonable level of collaboration betweensales and marketing, had a good management attitude towards coordination, wasimproving their market intelligence system and had good communications, butexhibited some conflict of interests. This organisation did not employ any of thefacilitators of collaboration. These results indicate that there is a positive correlationbetween the identified antecedents and collaboration between sales and marketing.

Future researchThe limitations of this study are that it is qualitative in nature and only considerslarge, UK organisations. Now that the antecedents to collaboration between sales andmarketing have been identified, a large-scale quantitative survey should be undertakento test the conceptual framework and further explore the sales and marketing interface,and the role of senior management. Future research may be extended to consider theinternational implications of the research.

Management implicationsThe extant literature suggests that the differences between the sales and marketingfunctions are necessary to the successful implementation of their activities.Nevertheless, to create unity of effort through aligned goals, shared planning and acollaborative culture to improve business performance, there needs to be a positiveattitude to coordination of activities from senior management. Eight additionalantecedents to collaboration between sales and marketing have been identified thatmay be utilised to improve the sales and marketing interface. Physical activities suchas cross-functional training, integration mechanisms (including job rotation andproject teams) and aligning rewards are not necessarily essential to improvingcollaboration between sales and marketing, but may be facilitators. If over-used,facilitators may be obstructive to creating collaboration. To improve the relationshipbetween sales and marketing, senior managers need to reduce conflict of interests,create effective communication, promote organisational learning, share marketinginformation and undertake joint marketing planning. This study also contends thatsales and marketing need to collaborate rather than integrate, and has established alink between increased collaboration between sales and marketing and improvedbusiness performance. These benefits may be in part due to the ability of theorganisation to respond to the complexity of the market place through collaboration,and aligning sales and marketing activities without removing the necessaryuniqueness of the sales and marketing functions.

References

Alldredge, K.G., Griffin, T.R. and Kotcher, L.K. (1999), “May the sales force be with you”,The McKinsey Quarterly, No. 3, pp. 110-21.

Anderson, R.E. (1996), “Personal selling and sales management in the new millennium”, Journalof Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 17-32.

Anderson, R.E., Dubinsky, A.J. and Mehta, R. (1999), “Sales managers: marketing’s best exampleof the Peter Principle”, Business Horizons, Vol. 42, pp. 19-26.

EJM41,7/8

952

Athens, D. (2002), “Integration between marketing and sales”, available at: www.marketingpower.com/live/contenet-printer-friendly.php?&Item_ID ¼ 16836 (accessed19 March 2002).

Baker, C. (1997), “Membership categorization and interview accounts”, in Silverman, D. (Ed.),Qualitative Research: Theory, Methods and Practice, Sage Publications, London, pp. 130-43.

Barclay, D.W. (1991), “Interdepartmental conflict in organisational buying: the impact of theorganisational context”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 48, May, pp. 145-59.

Buchanan, D. and Huczynski, A. (1997), Organisational Behaviour, 3rd ed., Prentice-Hall, HemelHempstead.

Cespedes, F.V. (1993), “Coordination sales and marketing in consumer goods firms”, Journal ofConsumer Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 37-55.

Cespedes, F.V. (1994), “Industrial marketing: managing new requirements”, Sloan ManagementReview, Vol. 35, Spring, pp. 45-60.

Child, J. (1985), Organisation: A Guide to Problems and Practice, 2nd ed., Harper & Row, London.

Cohen, S.G. (1993), “New approaches to teams and teamwork”, in Galbraith, J.R. andLawler, E.E. III (Eds), Organizing for the Future, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA,pp. 194-226.

Colletti, J.A. and Chonko, L.B. (1997), “Change management initiatives: moving salesorganisations to high performance”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management,Vol. 17, Spring, pp. 1-30.

Corstjens, J. and Corstjens, M. (1999), Store Wars, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.

Cross, J., Hartley, S.W., Rudelius, W. and Vassey, M.J. (2001), “Sales force activities andmarketing strategies in industrial firms: relationships and implications”, Journal ofPersonal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 199-206.

Dawes, P.L. and Massey, G.R. (2005), “Antecedents of conflict in marketing’s cross-functionalrelationship with sales”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 14 Nos 11/12, pp. 1327-44.

(The) Department of Trade and Industry (2004), “Small and medium enterprise definitions”,available at: www.sbs.gov.uk/analytical/ statistics/smedefs.php (accessed 30 July 2004).

Dewsnap, B. and Jobber, D. (2000), “The sales-marketing interface in consumer packaged-goodscompanies: a conceptual framework”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management,Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 109-19.

Evans, K.R. and Schlacter, J.L. (1985), “The role of sales managers and salespeople in a marketinginformation systems”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 5,November, pp. 49-55.

Griffin, A. and Hauser, J.R. (1996), “Integrating R&D and marketing: a review and analysis of theliterature”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 13, pp. 191-215.

Harrison, A. (2002), “Case study research”, in Partington, D. (Ed.), Essential Skills forManagement Research, Sage Publications, London, pp. 158-78.

Jaworski, B.J. and Kohli, A.K. (1993), “Market orientation: antecedents and consequences”,Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, July, pp. 53-70.

Kahn, K.B. (1996), “Interdepartmental integration: a definition with implications for productdevelopment performance”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 13, pp. 137-51.

Kahn, K.B. and Mentzer, J.T. (1998), “Marketing’s integration with other departments”, Journal ofBusiness Research, Vol. 42, pp. 53-62.

Kohli, A.K. and Jaworski, B.J. (1990), “Market orientation: the construct, research propositions,and managerial implications”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, April, pp. 1-18.

Sales andmarketing

953

Kotler, P., Rackham, N. and Krishnaswamy, S. (2006), “Ending the war between sales andmarketing”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84 No. 7, pp. 68-78.

Krohmer, H., Homburg, C. and Workman, J.P. (2002), “Should marketing be cross-functional?Conceptual development and international empirical evidence”, Journal of BusinessResearch, Vol. 55, pp. 451-65.

Labianca, G., Brass, D.J. and Gray, B. (1998), “Social networks and perceptions of intergroupconflict: the role of negative relationships and third parties”, Academy of ManagementJournal, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 55-67.

Loermans, J. (2002), “Synergizing the learning organisation and knowledge management”,Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 285-94.

Lorge, S. (1999), “Marketers are from Mars, sales people are from Venus”, Sales and MarketingManagement, Vol. 151, April, pp. 27-33.

Menon, A., Bharadwaj, S.G. and Howell, R. (1996), “The quality and effectiveness of marketingstrategy: effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict in intraorganisationalrelationship”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 299-313.

Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), An Expanded Sourcebook Qualitative Data Analysis,2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Montgomery, D.B. and Webster, F.E. Jr (1997), “Marketing’s interfunctional interfaces: the MSIworkshop on management of corporate fault zones”, Journal of Market FocusedManagement, Vol. 2, pp. 7-26.

Morgan, R.E. and Turnell, C.R. (2003), “Market-based organisational learning and marketperformance gains”, British Academy of Management, Vol. 14, pp. 255-74.

Murray, J.A. and O’Driscoll, A. (2002), “Discovering diversity in marketing practice”, EuropeanJournal of Marketing, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 373-90.

Narver, J.C. and Slater, S.F. (1990), “The effect of a market orientation on business profitability”,Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, October, pp. 20-35.

Olson, E.M., Cravens, D.W. and Slater, S.F. (2001), “Competitiveness and sales management:a marriage of strategies”, Business Horizons, Vol. 44, March/April, pp. 25-30.

Oxford University Press (1993), The Oxford Dictionary for the Business World, OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford.

Parasuraman, A.P., Grewal, D. and Krishman, R. (2004), Marketing Research, Houghton-Mifflin,Boston, MA.

Piercy, N.F. (1986), “The role and function of the chief marketing executive and the marketingdepartment: a study of medium-sized companies in the UK”, Journal of MarketingManagement, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 265-98.

Piercy, N.F. (2002), Market-Led Strategic Change: A Guide to Transforming the Process of Goingto Market, 3rd ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.

Piercy, N.F. (2006), “The strategic sales organisation”, The Marketing Review, No. 6, pp. 3-28.

Rosenbloom, B. and Anderson, R.E. (1984), “The sales manager: tomorrow’s super marketer”,Business Horizons, Vol. 27, March/April, pp. 50-6.

Rouzies, D., Anderson, E., Kohli, A.K., Micheals, R.E., Weitz, B.A. and Zoltners, A.A. (2005),“Sales and marketing integration: a proposed framework”, Journal of Personal Selling andSales Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 113-22.

Ruekert, R.W. and Walker, O.C. Jr (1987), “Marketing’s interaction with other functional units:a conceptual frame work and empirical evidence”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51, pp. 1-19.

EJM41,7/8

954

Shapiro, B.P. (1988), “What the hell is market oriented?”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 88,pp. 119-25.

Shapiro, B. (2002), “Want a happy customer? Coordinate sales and marketing”, available at:http://hbswk.hbs.edu/pubitem.jhtml?id ¼ 3154&sid ¼ 0&pid ¼ 0&t ¼ customer(accessed 6 April 2006).

Slater, S.F. and Narver, J.C. (1995), “Market orientation and learning organisation”, Journal ofMarketing, Vol. 59, July, pp. 63-74.

Souder, W.E. (1988), “Managing relations between R&D and marketing in new productdevelopment projects”, Journal of Product Innovation, Vol. 5, pp. 6-19.

Strahle, W.M., Spiro, R.L. and Acito, F. (1996), “Marketing and sales: strategic alignment andfunctional implementation”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 16No. 1, pp. 1-20.

Tjosvold, D. (1988), “Cooperative and competitive interdependence”, Group and OrganisationsStudies, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 274-89.

Webster, F.E. Jr (1981), “Top management’s concerns about marketing issues for the 1980s”,Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45, Summer, pp. 9-16.

Webster, F.E. Jr (1997), “The future role of marketing in the organisation”, in Lehman, D.R. andJocz, K.E. (Eds), Reflections on the Future of Marketing, Practice and Education, MarketingScience Institute, Cambridge, MA, pp. 39-66.

Weitz, B.A. and Bradford, K.D. (1999), “Personal selling and sales management: a relationshipmarketing perspective”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 27 No. 2,pp. 241-54.

Workman, J.P. Jr, Homburg, C. and Gruner, K. (1998), “Marketing organisation: an integrativeframework of dimensions and determinants”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62, July, pp. 21-41.

Yandle, J. and Blythe, J. (2000), “Intra-departmental conflict between sales and marketing:an exploratory study”, The Journal of Selling and Major Account Management, Vol. 2No. 3, pp. 3-31.

About the authorsKen Le Meunier-FitzHugh is a Lecturer in Management at Birkbeck, University of London. Herecently obtained a PhD in Marketing and Strategic Management from Warwick BusinessSchool, The University of Warwick. His research interests include the exploration of the interfacebetween sales and marketing and international marketing. Prior to undertaking this research, hespent 20 years working in sales and marketing for a range of organisations, including Yamahaand Thorn/EMI. He also has experience working both in the UK and overseas. Ken LeMeunier-FitzHugh is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:k.le-meunier-fitzhugh@bbk.ac.uk

Nigel F. Piercy is Professor of Marketing, Warwick Business School, The University ofWarwick. He holds a PhD from the University of Wales and a higher doctorate (DLitt) fromHeriot-Watt University, Edinburgh. His current research interests focus on strategic sales andaccount management. His work has been published in many journals including the Journal ofMarketing, the Journal of International Marketing, and the Journal of the Academy of MarketingScience. He is co-author to David Cravens on Strategic Marketing, 8th edition, published byIrwin/McGraw-Hill in 2006.

Sales andmarketing

955

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints