SCIENCE ASSIGNMENT(No Plagairism, A++ work, on time)

Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly 99

Sport Marketing Quarterly, 2017, 26, 99-109, © 2017 West Virginia University

Sport Ticket Sales Training: Perceived Effectiveness and Impact on Ticket Sales Results

Nels Popp, Jason Simmons, and Chad D. McEvoy

Nels Popp, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of Exercise and Sport Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill . His research interests include sport sales and revenue generation in college athletics . Jason Simmons, PhD, is an assistant professor of sport administration in the School of Human Services at the University of Cincinnati . His research focuses on the intersection of sport and family, specifically inter-role conflict between sport and fami- ly roles, as well as sport consumer behavior . Chad D. McEvoy, EdD, is a professor and chair of the Department of Kinesiology and Physical Education at Northern Illinois University . His research focuses on revenue generation in intercollegiate and professional sport .

Abstract

Ticket sales are the lifeblood of nearly every sport organization . Not only do ticket sales generate revenue, outbound sales programs charged with selling tickets aid sport organizations in the development of custom- er relationships and distribution of marketing materials and messages . Despite the importance of sales in sport, minimal scholarly research has been conducted within sport management literature to determine the effect of sales training on sales performance, as well as perceptions of sales training effectiveness by employ- ees . The current study addresses this gap . Data collected from 140 ticket sales professionals reveals not only an alarming lack of sales training being conducted, but also a statistically significant relationship between the amount of time spent in certain sales training methods and attainment of sales goals . Further, sales man- agers and sales representatives differed in perceptions of which training methodologies were most effective .

Keywords: sales training, ticket sales, sales effectiveness

Introduction Revenue produced by ticket sales continues to sustain the majority of spectator sport organizations . As such, it is imperative for those sport organizations to con- sistently maximize selling opportunities, no matter the environment in which the organization operates . While sports teams typically see an uptick in ticket buying with on-field success or the construction of a new venue, these factors represent unreliable long-term marketing tools . Team success is often fleeting, and the honeymoon effect of new stadia on attendance not only deteriorates rapidly (Howard & Crompton, 2003; McEvoy, Nagel, DeSchriver & Brown, 2005; Zygmont & Leadley, 2005) but is also an expensive venture . On the other hand, implementing an outbound ticket sales force has been shown to provide more consistent ticket sales results and excellent return on investment (Car- ter & Meitin, 2014; Fischer, 2016; King, 2010; McEvoy & Popp, 2012; Wanless & Judge, 2014) . In fact, nearly every North American major league team employs

such a department and the trend is quickly growing in popularity among NCAA Division I university athletics departments and minor league sports teams .

Outbound ticket sales programs employ individu- als who proactively call on potential ticket buyers in order to cultivate relationships, disseminate market- ing information, and provide customer service, while asking for prospects to purchase tickets . Sport orga- nizations now employ dozens of individuals in these roles . As the popularity of such outbound ticket sales programs has grown, many sport organizations have also changed their approach to developing sales forces . Initially, teams filled their sales force with entry-level employees who possessed little sales experience . Most of these sellers were given scant training, few resources, poor leads, and were placed in extremely difficult and highly competitive environments (King, 2010; Mullin, Hardy, & Sutton, 2014) . Frequently, sport sales manag- ers believed successful sellers would rise to the top of this challenging work environment, while those who

100 Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly

did not have the “drive to succeed” would soon quit and be replaced . Because sport organizations rarely struggle to attract job applicants, this process seemed adequate . More recently, however, many sport managers have begun realizing the inefficiencies of such a process . In particular, these managers have recognized the impor- tance of proper training and the hiring of more quali- fied personnel . High turnover among sales employees requires greater managerial effort to hire and train new staff, which reduces organizational productivity and sales efficiency .

Sport sales managers are now placing greater em- phasis on staffing appropriately, providing sellers with better resources, developing a better sales culture, and training more effectively . In order to accomplish this, sales managers need to know what sales training meth- odologies are most effective and whether certain sales training types work better with particular individuals . Sales managers and trainers have several techniques and methodologies at their disposal, including reading assignments, role play exercises, sales call evaluations, observations, personal assessments, computer modules, and third-party trainers . While sales training effective- ness has been examined within the business literature, no prior sport management research has specifically examined which types of training are most utilized, and seen as most effective, by both sport ticket sellers and sport sales managers . Thus, the purpose of the current student is to assess sport sales training and examine type, frequency, and effectiveness of ticket sales training methodologies, through the lens of both managers and sales representatives, as well as from both high- and low-achieving sellers .

Theoretical Framework Over the last two decades, several researchers have examined training effectiveness within the sales profes- sion (Attia, Honeycutt, & Fakhr, 2013; Erffmeyer, Russ, & Hair, 1991; Honeycutt, Ford, & Tanner, 1994; Lassk, Ingram, Kraus, & Di Mascio, 2012; Powers, DeCarlo, & Gupte, 2010; Shepherd, Gordon, Ridnour, Weilbaker, & Lambert, 2011) . Most of this literature stems from the work of Kirkpatrick (1994), who suggested effective sales training is a multi-faceted construct . Based on his work, a four-level sales training evaluation model was developed, comprised of the following hierarchical assessment progression: (1) reaction to training, (2) knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSA) learning, (3) changes in behavior, and (4) outcome assessment .

The Kirkpatrick model suggests effective sales train- ing begins with trainees exhibiting a belief the training received is beneficial . Of all four components to the model, reaction to training is the easiest to measure and most commonly performed (Tyler, 2002) . Assess-

ment is typically achieved through trainee surveying . The second stage of the model, KSA learning, involves testing whether the concepts learned in training have been retained by the trainees . Assessment of this stage is typically performed through pen-and-paper exams or computer modules covering the material taught (Attia et al ., 2013) . Measuring the third stage of the model, change in behavior, requires a process to determine whether trainees apply lessons learned in training to their actual job duties . This is typically accomplished through qualitative assessment of job performance (be- havior) by managers (Erffmeyer & Johnson, 2001) . Fi- nally, outcome assessment involves measuring whether applied lessons from training result in actual improved work performance (Griffin, 2014) . This fourth stage is the most difficult to measure accurately, as it is difficult to isolate the impact of training on sales performance from other external factors such as marketing, pricing, or market environment (Attia, et al ., 2013) .

Kirkpatrick’s model has enjoyed widespread accep- tance and has been examined by researchers in many fields, including sales training . For example, Leach and Liu (2003) examined the interrelationships of Kirkpat- rick’s four stages, finding empirical evidence supporting the hierarchical nature of the model, an assertion also supported by Tan and Newman (2012) . Attia, Honey- cutt, and Leach (2005) expanded Kirkpatrick’s work by introducing sub-categories of sales training assessment such as an examination of both firm and individual needs and a closer examination of organizational goals relative to training type . Recent sales training research has built upon Kirkpatrick’s original model for assessing sales training effectiveness, focusing on additional items such as content development and delivery of sales train- ing (Lassk, et al ., 2012; Powers, et al ., 2010), differences between sales training practices of smaller and larger firms (Honeycutt, et al ., 1994; Shepherd, et al ., 2011), and whether new technologies are effectively being utilized by sales trainers and businesses (Erffmeyer, et al ., 1991) . Several researchers have also unearthed links between the type of sales training implemented—such as on-the-job training, lectures, web-based instruc- tion, role plays, and mentoring—and its effectiveness with salesperson success (Gordon, Shepherd, Lambert, Ridnour, & Weilbaker, 2012; Powers et al ., 2010) as well as job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Pettijohn, Pettijohn, & Taylor, 2009) .

While this theoretical model examining sales training effectiveness has stood the test of time, sales training assessment is still underutilized, limiting the ability of firms to effectively train (Attia et al ., 2013; Lassk, et al ., 2012) . As Salopek (2009) bluntly states, “… research shows that U .S . businesses spend approximately $15 billion per year on sales training … (yet) those same

Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly 101

salespeople find the training ineffective or less than useful” (para . 1) . While most sales managers would agree assessing sales training effectiveness is important, few conduct such assessments or even know how they would do so if they had the resources available to them (Attia et al ., 2005; Erffmayer et al . 1992; Leach & Liu, 2003) .

Literature Review While generalizable sales training effectiveness has been assessed at the macro level—focusing on broad industry categories such as retail—few studies have examined specific industry segments, which may feature key differences within the sales process . Sport ticket sales is one such industry segment . Live sport consumption dif- fers from many other commercial products and services for several reasons: (a) there is a high level of consumer identification for the product, (b) the live sport prod- uct is produced and consumed simultaneously with no shelf life, (c) there are multiple ways in which the sport product can be consumed, and (d) control over the core sport product is often out of the producers’ hands (Mul- lin et al ., 2014; Wakefield, 2006) . As such, the marketing and selling processes of the live sport product differ as well . For example, Lawrence and Moberg (2009) suggest the sale of luxury suites and premium seating within sports venues require an atypical selling process be- cause of (a) the unique post-sale delivery of purchased services, (b) lack of control over product performance, and (c) the inclusion of numerous unquantifiable bene- fits . Sutton, Lachowetz, and Clark (2000) elucidate that many consumers who purchase sports tickets are unfa- miliar with all the ways the product can be used (such as a business tool), requiring sales professionals to use an “eduselling” approach . In addition, sport teams sell a range of products such as single game tickets, group, partial and full season tickets, and premium seating or suites, in addition to sponsorship and media packages . Irwin, Sutton, and McCarthy (2008) suggest each of these products is more effectively sold by sales represen- tatives with particular matching skills and personality types . If sport sales sellers require specific skills to sell a unique product, the argument can also be made that sport sales managers must train their employees in an intentional and specialized manner . As such, it becomes even more critical that sales training assessment be examined and improved for effectiveness . A few orga- nizations, such as Major League Soccer’s National Sales Center (Mickle, 2010), have made large contributions to the sport sales training model, but to date, little practi- tioner or academic research has examined sport ticket sales training methodology .

In fact, research devoted to any aspect of sport sales in general is scant, as highlighted by Irwin and Sutton

(2011) . In their work examining sport sales training, Ir- win, Southall, and Sutton (2007) developed a sport sales instructional model for classroom training . Links have been suggested between the duration of sales training and ticket revenue generated by sales representatives for outbound ticket sales teams among NCAA Division I college athletic departments (McEvoy & Popp, 2012) and improved training is often cited as a means to im- prove ticket sellers effectiveness (Irwin & Sutton, 2011; Popp, 2015; Smith & Roy, 2011; Wanless & Judge, 2014) . A lack of effective sales training and guidance allocated to entry-level sales representatives has been shown to be a critical component in the demise of a proactive ticket sales program (Bouchet, Ballouli, & Bennett, 2011) .

A few authors have tried to pinpoint the specific skills desired in new sport ticket sales employees . It appears leveraging post-sale opportunities, improving commu- nication, developing customer relationships, and using a consultative selling approach are the skills most highly valued by sport sales managers and are viewed as some of the most difficult aspects to teach (Pierce & Irwin, 2014; Pierce, Petersen, & Lee, 2014) . In fact, recently Pierce and Irwin (2016) developed a model containing 40 competencies sought by sales managers when hiring entry-level sellers . These studies did not, however, examine how effectively sport ticket sales employees develop those competencies or how those employees feel about the effectiveness of the training they received . More importantly, to date, no research within sport sales has examined the relationship between type of training received and sales effectiveness .

In order to determine whether the Kirkpatrick train- ing effectiveness model is indeed applicable to sport ticket sales, and to improve current sport sales training methodology, research must begin by assessing the current sales training methods employed within sport organizations . Nearly all of the major professional sport leagues in the United States have embraced the hiring of outbound ticket sales teams as an effective method to improve ticket sales (Fischer, 2016; King, 2010), while many NCAA Division I athletics departments have followed suit (Carter & Meitin, 2014; DiFebo, 2008; Popp, 2015) . While some variability exists regarding the extent to which sport ticket sales professionals are hired and trained within major league teams, most subscribe to relatively similar models . The development of outbound ticket sales departments within college athletics, however, is a more immature and varied space . Different athletics departments have adopted various philosophies on implementing, hiring, and training sales teams . Some departments have virtual- ly ignored outbound sales efforts, instead relying on traditional marketing and in-bound selling, while other departments have embraced the major league sports

102 Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly

model, hiring dozens of sales professionals (Carter & Meitin, 2014) . Some departments have relegated sales duties to student interns and graduate assistants, while others have hired third-party vendors to manage their outbound sales efforts (Popp, 2015) .

Even for sport organizations that spend considerable time training sales hires, training methodologies are rarely assessed for effectiveness . While many different methodologies for sales training exist, sales managers frequently perpetuate training techniques with which they are familiar or comfortable . Better assessment of sales training effectiveness, which includes insights from both managers and trainees, would likely improve instruction .

Research Questions The purpose of the current study was to determine type, frequency, and effectiveness of ticket sales training utilized by sport organizations, from both a managerial and trainee perspective . The study is rooted in both the first and fourth components of Kirkpatrick’s training assessment model, examining reaction to training and the connection between training and outcomes . NCAA Division I athletic departments served as the popula- tion . The following research questions were addressed:

RQ1: Do ticket sales representatives and ticket sales managers differ in their perceptions of the ef- fectiveness of various sales training methodologies within NCAA Division I athletic departments?

RQ2: Are there significant differences in how ticket sales representatives and ticket sales manag- ers rate the value of sales training feedback received within NCAA Division I athletic departments?

RQ3: Is there a significant difference in likelihood of achieving sales goals based on the amount of sales training received?

RQ4: Is there a significant difference in likelihood of achieving sales goals based on perceived quality of sales training received?

Research Design and Methodology The sample for this study consisted of outbound ticket sales staff members and managers of NCAA Division I athletic departments . As noted, the hiring and training processes in professional sport are relatively similar; however, in college athletics great variability exists in the resources dedicated to sales training, experience of sales managers, number of personnel, and training methods utilized . As the purpose of this study was to better understand the various sales training methodol- ogies utilized in a sport setting, as well as the perceived effectiveness of those trainings, the college athletic space was deemed appropriate given the vast differences

in organizational strategies and approaches toward sales currently existing in college athletics .

To identify potential respondents, the researchers examined various online directories of all NCAA Divi- sion I athletics websites to acquire the email addresses of individuals whose primary job function revolved around efforts to sell college sports tickets through traditional outbound, proactive sales calling . Individu- als whose primary job duties focused on overall athletic marketing or ticket operations were not included in the database . The final population, after eliminating dead email links, included 658 individuals .

An electronic survey was developed based on the work of Gordon, et al, (2012) and Leach and Liu (2003), measuring perceived effectiveness of training meth- odologies . The instrument was comprised of 16 items, most of which included a stem and multiple responses measured on five-point Likert-type scales . These items gauged: (a) types/amounts of sales training employed; (b) perceived effectiveness of various sales training methodologies; and (c) self-assessment questions . Gordon et al . (2012) developed their instrument based on the work of previous research (Dubinsky, Mehta, & Anderson, 2001; Shepherd & Ridnour, 1995), the results of the World-Class Sales Competency Model developed by the American Society for Training and Development, and feedback provided by multiple sales industry con- sultants . The instrument was also pilot-tested, then used with 3,000 subjects . It should also be noted that within the current study, the key items measured through the scale do not represent larger constructs, but rather con- sist of commonly agreed upon training methodologies and feedback types found frequently in sales training . For example, respondents were asked to “please rate the following forms of sales training in terms of how effective you personally found each form” followed by 11 types of training, discussed later in this section . Re- spondents were also able to indicate a “not applicable” to each training methodology or form of feedback .

In addition, the instrument included 12 items de- signed to capture demographic and background infor- mation on participants such as previous experience, training, and job duties . The instrument was reviewed by a panel of four sport sales training experts to gauge content validity . A request to complete the electronic survey was sent to all 658 email addresses in April so as to collect information based on the previous school year . Two follow-up emails were also sent to the email addresses approximately one week after each prior message .

To answer the research questions posed, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and chi-square analysis were conducted to detect the presence of mean differences among groups . Respondents were asked to rate both

Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly 103

how frequent and how effective various sales training methodologies were within their current employers . Training methodologies examined included: (a) role plays, (b) video tutorials, (c) external trainers, (d) computer training programs, (e) sales seminars, (f) self-analysis, (g) peer-reviewed phone calls, (h) manag- er-reviewed phone calls, (i) observations of face-to-face sales meetings, (j) managers reviewing face-to-face sales meetings, and (k) informal coaching or mentoring . Respondents were also asked to rate both the frequency and value of various types of sales training feedback . The forms of feedback analyzed included: (a) recom- mended sales articles to read, (b) recommended sales books to read, (c) mentoring by senior administrators, (d) formal/standardized manager evaluations, (e) infor- mal manager evaluations, (f) reviews of recorded phone calls, (g) formal peer evaluations, (h) peer mentoring, and (i) customer evaluations .

In addition, respondents answered questions regard- ing the amount of initial training they received before making sales calls, as well as the amount of on-going sales training they receive and the number of hours per month they spend doing sales training . They were also asked on a five-point Likert-type scale how well they met their sales goal for the year, with anchors of “fell very short” and “greatly exceeded .” Regarding this sales goal item, the third and fourth research questions examined in this study required measures of sales effec- tiveness or performance as dependent variables . Devel- oping a measure of sales performance, however, proved problematic . Using number of tickets sold or ticket revenue generated would at first appear to be a viable outcome metric . However, college athletics departments have various inventory available to sell, have a wide

variety of price points, and their teams enjoy a range of popularity levels . In addition, the number of sales staff employed by the organization can dramatically change the potential amount of revenue that can be generated . For all of these reasons, a decision was made to sim- ply ask respondents how they performed relative to their sales goals from the beginning of the year . Using this variable, groups of participants were established based on whether sales goals were not reached, met, or exceeded .

Results A total of 140 respondents completed the survey, for a response rate of 21 .3% . Not all participants answered all items . Among all respondents, 76 .6% were male and 94 .5% were full-time employees . The sample was split nearly evenly between sales representatives (52 .0%) and those who self-identified as sales managers (48 .0%) . Among respondents, 62 .6% worked directly for an athletics department and 37 .4% worked for an outsourced company . Among respondents who indi- cated they worked for an athletic department, the split between managers (n = 31) and sales representatives (n = 30) was nearly even . Similar results were found among those indicating they worked for an outsourced company, with 17 indicating they were managers and 20 indicating they were sales representatives .

Regarding initial sales training, 6 .5% of respondents indicated sales representatives received no training prior to making sales calls and another 17 .4% received fewer than two hours of training before making their first calls . After initial sales training, 32 .9% of respon- dents said no feedback regarding the training was col- lected and just 9 .3% were actually tested on the knowl-

  Overall Managers Reps ANOVA Methodology Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD F Sig.

Informal Coaching/Mentoring* 4 .17 1 .00 4 .52 0 .70 3 .85 1 .13 11 .407 0 .001* Manager Review* 3 .96 1 .13 4 .34 0 .78 3 .62 1 .29 8 .994 0 .004* Face-to-Face Observation 3 .94 1 .19 4 .08 0 .94 3 .79 1 .41 1 .068 0 .305 Role Play* 3 .84 1 .07 4 .18 0 .76 3 .55 1 .21 7 .859 0 .006* Face-to-Face Review* 3 .78 1 .18 4 .23 0 .88 3 .21 1 .29 13 .771 0 .000* Third-Party Trainer 3 .75 1 .25 3 .93 1 .11 3 .62 1 .35 0 .918 0 .342 Peer Review 3 .70 1 .05 3 .90 1 .01 3 .56 1 .07 1 .739 0 .192 Formal Self-Evaluation* 3 .61 1 .08 3 .94 1 .04 3 .33 1 .04 6 .935 0 .010* Sales Seminar 3 .23 1 .18 3 .28 1 .14 3 .18 1 .26 0 .079 0 .780 Computer Training 2 .93 1 .16 2 .81 1 .21 3 .05 1 .13 0 .429 0 .516 Video Tutorial 2 .89 1 .08 3 .08 1 .13 2 .71 1 .01 1 .548 0 .219

* p< .05

Table 1 Effectiveness Mean Scores for Initial Sales Training Methodologies (5-point scale)

104 Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly

edge and skills learned from the training . When asked to rate the level of on-going sales training (beyond initial sales training) within their organization on a five- point scale (1 = poor, 5 = excellent), the mean score was 2 .87 with 36 .3% of respondents indicating a 1 or a 2 . A total of 15 .2% of respondents said their organization provided no on-going sales training and an additional 35 .7% said the organization devoted fewer than two hours a month to on-going sales training .

RQ1: Perceptions of Sales Training Methodologies The first research question tested for significant dif- ferences between how sales representatives and sales managers rate the effectiveness of training . Mean effectiveness scores were calculated for 11 training methodologies . One-way between subjects ANOVAs were conducted to compare the effect of job type (man- ager/sales representative) on perception scores of the various methodologies . Significant differences at the p < .05 level in group mean scores were found for five of the methodologies . In all five cases, managers rated the effectiveness of the training methodology higher than sales representatives . In fact, all but one (comput- er training) of the perception scores were higher for managers compared to sales representatives . Complete results can be found in Table 1 .

RQ2: Value of Sales Training Feedback The second research question tested for significant differences between how sales representatives and sales managers rate the value of sales training feedback . Mean score values were calculated for nine forms of sales training feedback . One-way between subjects ANOVAs were conducted to compare the effect of job type (manager/sales representative) on ratings of the various feedback types . Significant differences at the p

< .05 level in group mean scores were found for four of the feedback methodologies . For all four of these vari- ables, managers rated the value of the feedback higher than sales representatives . In fact, group mean scores for all nine feedback types were rated more highly by managers, even though not all differences were signifi- cant . Complete results can be found in Table 2 .

RQ3: Amount of Sales Training by Sales Achievement The third research question examined differences in the amount of training received between sales employees who had varying levels of sales success . In order to an- swer this research question, respondents were grouped according to how they fared in meeting sales goals for the past year . Based on these results, and in order to more meaningfully examine differences, respondents were placed in three different groups: (a) those who fell very or a little short of their sales goal (n = 27), (b) those who met their sales goal (n = 18), and (c) those who slightly or greatly exceeded their sales goal (n = 55) . Group comparisons were then conducted on three measures: (a) amount of initial training received, (b) amount of on-going training received, and (c) frequency of participation in each type of training methodology .

Respondents were asked to indicate how much initial training they received, selecting from the following ordinal variables: (a) none, (b) fewer than two hours, (c) between 2 and 10 hours, (d) between 10 and 20 hours, and (e) more than 20 hours . A chi-square test was performed and no relationship was found between amount of initial training and reported sales success, X2 (8, N = 100) = 9 .10, p = .334 . However, it should be noted that 54 .5% of high-performing sellers received more than 10 hours of initial training, while only 29 .6% of low-performing sellers had more than 10 hours of initial training .

All Managers Reps ANOVA Feedback Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD F Sig.

Senior Mentorship* 3 .58 1 .19 3 .86 1 .09 3 .35 1 .23 4 .286 .041* Informal Evaluation 3 .51 1 .17 3 .72 0 .96 3 .33 1 .31 2 .640 .108 Given Articles to Read* 3 .34 1 .19 3 .81 1 .03 2 .92 1 .17 15 .004 .000* Peer Mentorship 3 .31 1 .25 3 .44 1 .20 3 .18 1 .30 .976 .326 Formal Evaluation* 3 .19 1 .30 3 .55 1 .17 2 .88 1 .33 6 .379 .013* Given Books to Read* 2 .97 1 .31 3 .43 1 .04 2 .56 1 .40 10 .864 .001* Customer Evaluation 2 .89 1 .53 3 .07 1 .56 2 .72 1 .52 1 .104 .296 Phone Call Reviews 2 .81 1 .32 3 .00 1 .38 2 .64 1 .26 1 .557 .216 Peer Evaluation 2 .60 1 .33 2 .83 1 .34 2 .37 1 .29 2 .608 .110

* p< .05

Table 2 Value of Sales Training Feedback Type (5-point scale)

Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly 105

A similar test was performed with the amount of on-going sales training . Respondents indicated whether their on-going sales training consisted of: (a) none, (b) fewer than 2 hours a month, (c) 2 to 5 hours per month, (d) 5-10 hours per month, and (e) more than 10 hours per month . Results of a chi-square test revealed no relationship between the amount of on-going training and reported sales success, X2 (8, N = 99) = 10 .14, p = .257 . Again, however, it should be noted that among low-achieving sellers, 62 .9% received fewer than two hours a month of on-going training, while among high-achieving sellers, only 38 .9% reported receiving fewer than two hours of training per month . When asked to rate the level of on-going sales training on a five-point Likert-type scale anchored by 1 = “poor” and 5 = “excellent,” no significant differences were found among group mean scores, although means did go up with higher sales performance (see Table 3) .

When examining the frequency of various types of initial training methodologies among sales employ- ees grouped by their sales success, a distinct pattern emerges . Table 4 lists descriptive statistics showing the percentage of each group of sellers (those who fell below their sales goal, those who met their sales goal, and those who exceeded their sales goal) who received

more than two hours per month of on-going sales training . For 10 of the 11 variables, the better the sales performance, the larger percentage of the group re- ceived more on-going training . For some variables, such as face-to-face observations and reviews, the percentage of respondents receiving extended training was nearly triple compared to low-performing sellers .

RQ4: Sales Training Effectiveness by Sales Achievement Finally, comparisons were conducted to assess whether respondents who exceeded sales goals found particular types of training methods more effective than those who fell short of sales goals . To answer this research question, mean effectiveness scores among different groupings were calculated for the 11 training method- ologies examined . One-way between subjects ANOVAs were conducted to compare the effect of sales perfor- mance (short of sales goal, met sales goal, exceeded sales goal) on ratings of the various feedback types . Significant differences at the p < .05 level in group mean scores were found for two of the methodologies (and one additional difference was significant at the p < .10 level) . In all cases, respondents who exceeded sales goals rated the effectiveness of the training methodolo-

  Below Goal Met Goal Exceeded Goal Methodology >2 n >2 n >2 n

Informal Coaching/Mentoring 66 .7% 18 72 .2% 13 85 .5% 47 Role Play 55 .6% 15 55 .6% 10 72 .7% 40 Manager Review 44 .4% 12 50 .0% 9 63 .6% 35 Formal Self-Evaluation 37 .0% 10 44 .4% 8 47 .3% 26 Face-to-Face Observation 22 .2% 6 38 .9% 7 60 .0% 33 Face-to-Face Review 18 .5% 5 44 .4% 8 53 .7% 29 Peer Review 29 .6% 8 33 .3% 6 33 .3% 18 Third-Party Trainer 18 .5% 5 33 .3% 6 40 .0% 22 Video Tutorial 7 .4% 2 11 .1% 2 20 .0% 11 Sales Seminar 3 .7% 1 27 .8% 5 20 .0% 11 Computer Training 11 .1% 3 16 .7% 3 9 .3% 5

Table 4 Frequency of Initial Training Received By Level of Sales Goal Achieved

All Below Goal Met Goal Exceeded Goal Measurement* Level SD Level SD Level SD Level SD F Sig.

On 2 .91 1 .35 2 .48 1 .34 2 .94 1 .30 3 .11 1 .34 2 .01 0 .139

*mean scores represent ratings, not actual hours of training

Table 3 Training Hours By Level of Sales Goal Achieved

106 Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly

gy higher than respondents who fell below sales goals . Complete results can be found in Table 5 .

Discussion Sales is a critical function of sport organizations . Sales is also a business function that produces very tangible results, meaning many sales professionals are assessed on performance . Sales performance is magnified in the sport industry, as sales success is often publicly visible via the number of event attendees and tickets sold . However, little research has examined how well sport organizations train their sales force . More effective sales training leads to greater sales success and efficiency; de- sirable performance outcomes aligned with the fourth and final stage of Kirkpatrick’s (1994) sales training evaluation model . As previously noted, it can be diffi- cult at times to tease out the true effect of sales training on performance outcomes due to potentially confound- ing external variables also influencing customer pur- chase decisions (Attia et al ., 2013); however, this was the relationship the current study sought to assess .

First and foremost, the results of this study reveal an alarming lack of training within a large sector of the sport industry . Charlie Chislaghi (as cited in Irwin, et al ., 2008), a leading sports sales training consultant, suggests new ticket sales hires should receive two weeks of full-time training (80 hours) before their first sales call and ticket sales managers should spend a 30-day probation period listening to new hire sales calls and providing daily or weekly feedback . By contrast, the results of the current study suggest nearly a quarter of sales hires receive fewer than two hours of train- ing before making their first sales call and half of the

study respondents said their employer provides fewer than two hours of monthly on-going training . These numbers indicate sales training, particularly in college athletics, lags rather considerably behind more estab- lished industries, such as retail (Pettijohn et al ., 2009) . This is particularly troubling considering the competen- cies sales managers look for in entry-level sales repre- sentatives (Pierce & Irwin, 2016), many of which must be acquired and refined through initial and regular training . It is unlikely, for example, sales representatives will excel at opening a conversation, closing a sale, or adapting to objections posed by consumers without proper training .

In terms of what types of training methods are most effective with new sales hires, managers typically found training type to be more effective than trainees, often to a statistically significant degree . While this finding is not necessarily surprising, it does illustrate an import- ant point: managers must do a better job understanding what types of sales training their employees find effec- tive . On a five-point scale, managers rated eight of 11 training techniques as a 3 .90 or better (some as high as 4 .5 and 4 .3), indicating they believe the techniques they employ are effective . The trainees, however, did not rate a single training method greater than 3 .85, with four techniques scoring at or below 3 .2 . In general, however, sales managers and representatives were in agreement with regards to the most effective training techniques as informal coaching/mentoring, formal managerial re- views, and observing others making sales calls were rat- ed highly effective by both groups . On the other hand, managers suggested watching trainees in live, face-to- face sales interactions was effective, but this technique

All Below Goal Met Goal Exceeded Goal     Methodology Effect . SD Effect . SD Effect . SD Effect . SD F Sig .

Informal Coaching/Mentoring** 4 .18 0 .98 3 .92 0 .86 3 .41 1 .37 4 .56 0 .67 12 .304 .000 Manager Review 4 .04 1 .05 3 .79 1 .18 3 .77 1 .30 4 .25 0 .87 2 .018 .140 Face-to-Face Observation 3 .91 1 .25 3 .61 1 .42 3 .64 1 .50 4 .12 1 .08 1 .387 .257 Role Play* 3 .86 1 .06 3 .60 1 .04 3 .54 1 .45 4 .08 0 .92 2 .494 .089 Peer Review 3 .75 1 .00 3 .61 1 .08 3 .64 1 .12 3 .86 0 .92 .542 .584 Face-to-Face Review** 3 .74 1 .24 3 .19 1 .42 3 .08 1 .38 4 .18 0 .93 6 .658 .002 Third-Party Trainer 3 .73 1 .23 3 .67 1 .56 3 .62 0 .96 3 .80 1 .23 .124 .883 Formal Self-Evaluation 3 .69 1 .03 3 .45 1 .05 3 .47 0 .92 3 .87 1 .04 1 .592 .210 Sales Seminar 3 .26 1 .12 3 .25 1 .22 3 .10 1 .20 3 .32 1 .09 .139 .870 Video Tutorial 2 .81 1 .10 2 .62 1 .19 3 .13 1 .13 2 .82 1 .07 .522 .596 Computer Training 2 .74 1 .18 2 .63 1 .41 2 .56 1 .24 2 .85 1 .12 .245 .784

** p< .05; * p< .10

Table 5 Effectiveness of Initial Training Methodology By Level of Sales Goal Achieved

Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly 107

was rated much lower by sales representatives . Also, despite many sales managers utilizing formal self-evalu- ations of performance, sales representatives did not find this technique very effective, particularly when com- pared to their managers .

On a similar note, managers also tend to rate the effectiveness of sales training feedback given to employ- ees higher than sales representatives . When asked to evaluate training and performance feedback received by managers, sales representatives rated many items close to or even below the midpoint of the five-point Likert- type scale . In contrast, managers rated all feedback types between 3 and 4 on the scale, with the exception of peer evaluations (2 .83) . This finding is notable because of the discrepancies between the group means . For example, managers indicated that giving representatives sales articles to read was the second highest rated form of feedback to help them improve . Sales representatives, however, rated it nearly a whole point lower (3 .81 com- pared to 2 .92), which is a stark contrast considering it occurred on a five-point scale . Similar to the evaluations of training techniques, the feedback findings would appear to tell managers their trainees are not nearly as satisfied with the feedback being provided as manag- ers might think . The results also indicate managerial feedback is viewed more importantly than customer or peer-generated feedback . Two of the most highly rated feedback types were mentoring by senior administrators and informal evaluations by managers, while the lowest rated feedback types included customer evaluations, reviews of phone calls, and peer evaluations .

This study also began to examine the connection between training and sales achievement . Repeatedly in the study, higher-achieving sellers reported more time spent training (both initially and on-going) and found multiple training methodologies more effective when compared to lower-achieving sellers . While factors such as ticket price, marketing, weather, and demand undoubtedly affect consumer purchase decisions, these results suggest a link between the amount of sales train- ing one receives and revenue as a product of sales . Of particular note, roughly 20% of lower-achieving sellers reported spending more than two hours in their initial training either watching other employees make live face-to-face sales or having managers watch trainees make live face-to-face sales calls . For high-achieving sellers, the percentages were around 60% . This extreme difference would seem to indicate sales managers should incorporate more live selling opportunities within training sessions so new hires can see others per- forming the job and can experience live selling them- selves . The high-achieving sellers also found reviewing others in live sales opportunities to be significantly more effective than sellers who did not meet their

sales goals . Sellers who exceeded their goals also found informal mentoring to be a significantly more effective training method .

For practitioners, these results provide ample lessons . For ticket sales managers who desire to improve the sales performance of their staff, it is critical to re-exam- ine their sales training methods . Input from trainees must be sought and acted upon . Sales trainers have a plethora of training techniques and methodologies at their disposal but do not always use these options effectively or frequently . NCAA Division I college athletics departments in particular are often under-re- sourced . For sales teams, this typically means managers feel pressure to quickly put new hires on the phones in order to start making sales calls . Managers themselves are rarely able to spend adequate time with both initial and on-going training due to other demands . The long- term consequences of this, however, are sellers who do not perform at their highest efficiency levels, which ultimately results in lower ticket sales . Managers must invest on the front end to better equip their sales em- ployees with the training and tools to perform better .

From a theoretical perspective, this study, first and foremost, contributes to a line of inquiry still in its infancy with regards to academic research . Past re- search has suggested the sport product is unique in nature (Mullin et al ., 2014) and requires sales approach- es different from many other products (Lawrence & Mobert, 2009; Sutton et al ., 2000) . While sales scholars have identified a relationship between sales training and success (Gordon et al ., 2012; Powers et al ., 2010), only a handful of scholars have attempted to research sales within sport (Irwin & Sutton, 2011) . This is somewhat troubling given the vital importance of a competent and effective sales team in generating revenue . As previously noted, existing sport sales training studies have focused on amount and/or existence of training (McEvoy & Popp, 2012) and desired competencies sales managers seek within sales representatives (Pierce & Irwin, 2016) . A gap exists, however, in understanding what type of sales training is being conducted in college sport, how effective employees perceive this training to be, and the potential relationship between training and sales re- sults . The current study addresses this gap by examining Kirkpatrick’s (1994) final level of sales training evalua- tion: measuring performance outcomes as a product of sales training . It is hoped this study can open the door to further work exploring the relevance of the Kirkpat- rick model to sport sales training and theory testing training effectiveness .

Limitations and Future Research As is the case with research, this study contained several limitations that should be considered when interpret-

108 Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly

ing results . First, the outcome variable of self-reported achievement of sales goals is an imperfect measure . As noted, challenges exist in using more practical measures such as revenue or number of tickets sold . Caution must be taken when attempting to draw causal relation- ships based on the findings reported here . Second, the current study did not account for prior sales training at an earlier job . This may be an important variable that predicts attainment of sales goals . Future research should attempt to capture the amount and types of sales training participants received earlier in their careers .

While important, sales performance is only one potential desirable outcome resulting from training . Pettijohn, Pettijohn, and Taylor (2007) and Pettijohn et al . (2009) noted sales training and the perceived im- portance of sales skills, acquired through training, has been shown to increase employee job satisfaction and organizational commitment, as well as decrease turn- over intentions . Given the costs associated with hiring and training new employees, future scholars should focus on the effect of sales training in sport on these non-performance outcomes to determine if such desir- able relationships are applicable .

Finally, data for this study was collected from sales representatives and sales managers working in colle- giate athletics . Schools vary drastically in resources such as personnel, market size, conference affiliation, and the use of third-party ticket sales vendors such as IMG Learfield Ticket Solutions or The Aspire Group . Examining the differences in the relationships found in the current study between sales personnel employed by their athletic department compared to those employed by third-party vendors may prove insightful as athletic department are faced with the choice to outsource tick- et sales or operate sales in-house . Additional research is needed to examine this effect .

References Attia, A . M ., Honeycutt, E . D ., & Fakhr, R . (2013) . Sales training

evaluation: An integrative framework and research agenda . Jour- nal of Selling and Major Account Management, 13, 33–44 .

Attia, A . M ., Honeycutt, E . D ., & Leach, M .P . (2005) . A three-stage model for assessing and improving sales force training and development . Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 25, 253–268 .

Bouchet, A ., Ballouli, K ., & Bennett, G . (2011) . Implementing a tick- et sales force in college athletics: A decade of challenges . Sport Marketing Quarterly, 20, 22–32 .

Carter, A ., & Meitin, M . (2014) . Filling the house . Athletic Manage- ment, 26, 22–26 .

Difebo, M . (2008) . A great start . Athletic Management, 20 . Retrieved from http://athleticmanagement .com/2008/04/18/a_great_start/ index .php

Dubinsky, A . J ., Mehta, R ., & Anderson, R . E . (2001) . Satisfaction with sales manager training: Design and implementation issues, European Journal of Marketing, 35, 27–50 .

Erffmeyer, R . C ., & Johnson, D . A . (2001) . An exploratory study of sales force automation practices: Expectations and realities . Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 21, 167–175 .

Erffmeyer, R . C ., Russ, K . R ., & Hair, J . F . (1991) . Needs assessment and evaluation in sales training programs . Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 11, 17–30 .

Fischer, J . (2016, May 20) . Despite tough on-court season, 76ers’ sales staff finds success . Sports Illustrated. Retrieved from http:// www .si .com/nba/2016/05/19/philadelphia-76ers-sales-tickets- nba-draft-lottery-sam-hinkie-brett-brown

Fulks, D . L . (2015) . NCAA Division I intercollegiate athletics pro- gram report: Revenues & expenses 2004–2014 . NCAA . Retrieved from https://www .ncaa .org/sites/default/files/2015%20Divi- sion%20I%20RE%20report .pdf

Gordon, G . L ., Shepherd, C . D ., Lambert, B ., Ridnour, R . E ., & Weilbaker, D . C . (2012) . The training of sales managers: Cur- rent practices . Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 27, 659–672 .

Griffin, R . (2014, July 1) . Donald Kirkpatrick (1924–2014) . Training Journal. Retrieved from https://www .trainingjournal .com/arti- cles/news/donald-kirkpatrick-1924-2014

Honeycutt, E . D ., Ford, J . B ., & Tanner, J . F . (1994) . Who trains sales- people? The role of sales trainers and sales managers . Industrial Marketing Management, 23, 65–70 .

Howard, D . R ., & Crompton, J . L . (2003) . An empirical review of the stadium novelty effect . Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12, 111–116 .

Irwin, R . L ., Southall, R . M ., & Sutton, W . (2007) . Pentagon of sport sales training: A 21st century sport sales training model . Sport Management Education Journal, 1, 18–39 .

Irwin, R . L ., & Sutton, W . A . (2011) . Ticket sales coaching innova- tion: A few pages from Paul Brown’s playbook . Sport Marketing Quarterly, 20, 103–111 .

Irwin, R . L ., Sutton, W . L ., & McCarty, L . M . (2008) . Sport promotion and sales management. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics .

King, B . (2010) . Always be closing . SportsBusiness Journal. Re- trieved from http://www .sportsbusinessdaily .com/Journal/Is- sues/2010/03/20100315/SBJ-In-Depth/Always-Be-Closing .aspx

Kirkpatrick, D . L . (1994) . Evaluation training programs: The four levels . San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler .

Lassk, F . G ., Ingram, T . N ., Kraus, F ., & Di Mascio, R . (2012) . The fu- ture of sales training: Challenges and related research questions . Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 31, 141–154 .

Lawrence, H . J ., & Moberg, C . R . (2009) . Luxury suites and team selling in professional sport . Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 15, 185–201 .

Leach, M . P ., & Liu, A . H . (2003) . Investigating interrelationships among sales training evaluation methods . Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 23, 327–339 .

McEvoy, C . D ., Nagel, M . S ., DeSchriver, T . D ., & Brown, M . T . (2005) . Facility age and attendance in Major League Baseball . Sport Management Review, 8, 19–41 .

McEvoy, C ., & Popp, N . (2012, June 18) . Measuring the scope and effectiveness of outbound ticket sales teams in NCAA Division I athletic departments . Winthrop Intelligence. Retrieved from http://winthropintelligence .com/2012/06/measuring-scope-ef- fectiveness-outbound-ticket-sales-teams-ncaa-division-i-athlet- ic-departments/

Mickle, T . (2010, May 24) . MLS will be first league to run exten- sive ticket sales training . SportsBusiness Journal . Retrieved from http://www .sportsbusinessdaily .com/Journal/Is- sues/2010/05/20100524/This-Weeks-Issue/MLS-Will-Be-First- League-To-Run-Extensive-Ticket-Sales-Training .aspx

Mullin, B . J ., Hardy, S ., & Sutton, W . A . (2014) . Sport marketing (4th ed .) . Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics .

Pettijohn, C . E ., Pettijohn, L . S ., & Taylor, A . J . (2007) . Does sales- person perceptions of the importance of sales skills improve sales performance, customer orientation, job satisfaction, and

Volume 26 • Number 2 • 2017 • Sport Marketing Quarterly 109

organizational commitment, and reduce turnover? Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 27, 75–88 .

Pettijohn, L . S ., Pettijohn, C . E ., & Taylor, A . J . (2009) . Retail sales training: Activities and effects of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover, and customer-orientation . Marketing Management Journal, 19, 46–57 .

Pierce, D ., & Irwin, R . (2014) . Sport sales compentency assessment model. Paper presented at the meeting of the Sport Marketing Association, Philadelphia, PA .

Pierce, D ., & Irwin, R . L . (2016) . Competency assessment for en- try-level sport ticket sales professionals . Journal of Applied Sport Management, 8, 54–75 .

Pierce, D ., Petersen, J ., & Lee, D . (2014) . Sport sales personnel per- ceptions of factors impacting job performance: A factor analysis of sport sales activities . International Journal of Sport Manage- ment, 15, 71–90 .

Popp, N . (2014, December 8) . Ticket sales in college athletics . Ath- letics Administration, 26–31 .

Powers, T ., DeCarlo, T ., & Gupte . G . (2010) . An update on the status of sales management training . Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 30, 6–20 .

Salopek, J . J . (2009) . The power of the pyramid . Talent Development Magazine. Retrieved from https://www .td .org/Publications/Mag- azines/TD/TD-Archive/2009/05/The-Power-of-the-Pyramid

Shepherd, C . D ., Gordon, G . L ., Ridnour, R . E ., Weilbaker, D . C ., & Lambert, B . (2011) . Sales manager training practices in small and large firms . American Journal of Business, 26, 92–117 .

Shepherd, C . D ., & Ridnour, R . E . (1995) . The training of sales managers: An exploratory study of sales management training practices . Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 15, 69–74 .

Smith, J . G ., & Roy, D . P . (2011) . A framework for developing cus- tomer orientation in ticket sales organizations . Sport Marketing Quarterly, 20, 93–102 .

Sutton, W . A ., Lachowetz, T ., & Clark, J . (2000) . EDUSELLING: The role of customer education in selling to corporate clients in the sport industry . International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 2, 145–158 .

Tan, K ., & Newman, E . (2012) . Sale force training evaluation . Jour- nal of Business & Economics Research, 10, 105–109 .

Tyler, K . (2002) . Evaluation evaluations: Asking the right questions is only the first step in creating a good training evaluation . HR Magazine, 47, 85–89 .

Wakefield, K . (2006) . Team sports marketing . Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann .

Wanless, E ., & Judge, L . W . (2014) . Improving collegiate ticket sales: The importance of a trained sales staff . Journal of Facility Plan- ning, Design, and Management, 2, 137–142 .

Zygmont, Z . X ., & Leadley, J . C . (2005) . When is the honeymoon over? Major League Baseball attendance 1970–2000 . Journal of Sport Management, 19, 278–299 .

Copyright of Sport Marketing Quarterly is the property of Fitness Information Technology, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.