The salesforce control-blend matrix
Blend behavior, outcome, supervision, and incentives around what the selling context makes observable.
| Design field | If it is visible | If it is not visible | Review question |
|---|---|---|---|
| Selling behavior | Activities can be coached or audited | Output is the only signal | What work should management support? |
| Outcome | Result and horizon are declared | Timing and attribution are unclear | Which outcome is actually being protected? |
| Product complexity | The difficulty of the offer is explicit | A complex sale is treated like a simple one | What can the seller reasonably control? |
| Market turbulence | Conditions can change the work | A historical plan becomes a permanent rule | Which control needs faster review? |
| Incentive | Pay signal and calculation base are visible | Compensation carries the whole system | What behavior or outcome is being encouraged? |
| Support and supervision | Coaching, training, and expectations are recorded | Control is confused with surveillance | Who helps the work improve? |
Swipe or scroll horizontally if the table is wider than your screen.
Reference & Evidence
Source: Author's diagnostic framework grounded in Cravens, Ingram, LaForge, and Young (1993) and de Oliveira Santini et al. (2019). The matrix is synthetic and does not prescribe a compensation plan.
Each line is a claim from the register this journal publishes against, resolved from the register at build time.
- A The design, and it is a test of someone else's propositions: "the authors develop a conceptual model depicting relationships between salesforce control systems, characteris"tics, performance and effectiveness "as a framework for testing the propositions formulated by Anderson and Oliver (1987)", with "a study of 144 diverse sales organizations" Cravens, Ingram, LaForge & Young. (1993) ·
CLY93-C1 - A The finding runs against the intuition: "the results imply a limited role for incen"tive compensation "in salesforce control systems" Cravens, Ingram, LaForge & Young. (1993) ·
CLY93-C2 - A And what they call for instead: "they also suggest the need for a proper blend between field sales management and compensation control and identify important avenues for future research" Cravens, Ingram, LaForge & Young. (1993) ·
CLY93-C3 - A "this paper conducts a meta-analysis based on 104 studies" of sales control systems de Oliveira Santini, Vieira, Ladeira & Sampaio. (2019) ·
OSV19-C1 - A The named relationships are the paper's own list: "significant relationships between behaviour- and outcome-based control systems and the complexity of the products, bonuses, financial performance, sales innovation, organizational support and satisfaction with supervisors" de Oliveira Santini, Vieira, Ladeira & Sampaio. (2019) ·
OSV19-C2 - A Each wins somewhere, and the paper says where: "behaviour-based control systems were the most effective mechanism in turbulent markets and for determining financial performance", while "outcome-based control systems were the most efficient instrument for complex products" de Oliveira Santini, Vieira, Ladeira & Sampaio. (2019) ·
OSV19-C3
Grades: A, verified against the printed page of the primary source · B, primary source, text layer only · C, authoritative secondary · D, reported.
Related exhibits
-
The salesforce observability map
From the essay Salesforce control starts with what managers can observe
-
The variable-pay risk-design card
From the essay Variable pay is a risk design when effort is hard to observe
-
Why is salesforce control a multi-faceted governance blend rather than a commission plan?
From the essay Salesforce control is a blend, not a commission plan