Multi-Level Leadership Interactions in Sales: Gender, Performance, and Tenure Effects

Posted on by

Conde, R., Dinulescu, C. and Pointer, L. (2025), “Multi-level leadership interactions in sales: exploring gender, performance and tenure effects”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-08-2024-0581

Keywords: female leaders, leader gender, leader performance, leader tenure, upper echelon
theory, managers, directors, multilevel modeling (MLM)

Dinulescu, Catalin - Management Science Professor

Introduction

Sales leadership is often described as an art as much as it is a science. Companies rely on their sales teams to drive revenue, but what role do leadership traits—such as leadership approach, performance, and tenure—play in shaping sales outcomes? The corporate world is increasingly emphasizing workforce representation, performance metrics, and leadership experience, yet little research has explored how these factors interact in a multi-tiered sales hierarchy.

This study delves into how the leadership approach, tenure, and performance of sales managers and directors impact the success of sales agents in a Fortune 100 financial services company. By analyzing how these leadership attributes interact across different hierarchical levels, this research aims to provide organizations with strategic insights into optimizing their sales leadership structures, improving employee productivity, and fostering more effective leadership development programs.

Literature Review

Upper Echelons Theory (UET) and Leadership Impact

The Upper Echelons Theory (Hambrick & Mason, 1984) suggests that leadership attributes significantly influence organizational outcomes. Research has established that varied leadership teams improve decision-making, enhance problem-solving capabilities, and drive innovation (Nielsen & Huse, 2010; Dezsö & Ross, 2012). However, much of this research has focused on top executives rather than mid-level leaders such as sales managers and directors.

Leadership representation has been shown to enhance team performance and engagement (Beltrán, 2019), yet disparities persist in sales leadership roles. Studies indicate that while different leadership styles can drive performance gains, leaders often face higher scrutiny and unique challenges in effectively managing their teams (Hoobler et al., 2018). Similarly, leadership tenure plays a crucial role in shaping outcomes, with research suggesting that experience can enhance decision-making, improve mentoring capabilities, and boost employee retention, but may also lead to complacency and resistance to change (Hambrick & Fukutomi, 1991).

Methodology and Analysis

This study employs an 18-month dataset covering 605 sales agents and 7,692 leadership interactions within a Fortune 100 financial services company. By applying hierarchical linear modeling (HLM), we systematically assess cross-level leadership effects and interactions. This approach allows for a more detailed understanding of how leadership traits influence agent performance at multiple organizational levels. The study examined three key factors:

  • Leadership Approach: Investigating whether different leadership styles (e.g., transformational, transactional, servant leadership) impact sales performance differently.
  • Performance Ratings: Assessing how high-performing managers and directors contribute to agent success and whether performance evaluations align with actual team outcomes.
  • Tenure: Understanding how experience at different leadership levels influences performance and whether long-tenured leaders create stability or stagnation within their teams.

Results and Findings

Our findings reveal a nuanced interplay between leadership traits and sales performance:

  • Director leadership approach matters: Certain leadership styles positively impact sales agent performance, reinforcing the strategic value of well-structured leadership at higher levels. Directors who adopt coaching-oriented, employee-centric leadership styles tend to inspire stronger engagement and productivity from their teams.
  • Manager leadership approach is less significant: Contrary to expectations, there was no significant difference in sales outcomes based on manager leadership style. However, managers who effectively align with director strategies tend to create more cohesive and motivated sales teams.
  • Performance influence is tiered: High-performing managers directly boost agent performance through active mentoring and real-time guidance, whereas high-performing directors do not exhibit the same direct effect. Instead, director-level performance is more closely tied to strategic decision-making and long-term organizational success.
  • The tenure paradox: Longer-tenured directors negatively affect performance directly, as they may become overly reliant on established practices, yet they enhance the impact of experienced managers. However, high-performing directors may impose unrealistic expectations, limiting the benefits of managerial experience by setting goals that may be misaligned with day-to-day sales realities.

These findings underscore the importance of strategic leadership alignment. Organizations must recognize that the impact of leadership traits varies across hierarchical levels, necessitating tailored leadership development strategies, mentorship programs, and performance review processes that account for these dynamics.

Conclusion

This study highlights the dynamic relationships between leadership traits, performance, and tenure in sales leadership. By understanding these interactions, organizations can refine their leadership development programs, ensure alignment between different leadership tiers, and optimize sales structures to drive both short-term and long-term performance gains. Future research should explore how cultural and organizational differences influence these effects, as well as how evolving workplace trends—such as remote work and AI-driven sales tools—may shift the nature of leadership interactions in sales organizations.

Alignment with U.N. Sustainable Development Goals

This research aligns with several UN Sustainable Development Goals:

  • Goal 4 (Quality Education): By providing data-driven insights into leadership effectiveness, this study contributes to the development of better sales management education and training programs. The findings support the design of leadership curricula that prepare future sales managers and directors with the necessary skills to navigate complex organizational structures.
  • Goal 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth): The study informs strategies for creating well-structured and high-performing workplaces, helping organizations foster sustainable economic growth and develop resilient leadership pipelines that promote employee engagement and retention.
  • Goal 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure): By identifying ways to optimize leadership structures and enhance managerial effectiveness, the study supports business innovation and more effective corporate leadership models, ensuring that companies remain competitive in an evolving economic landscape.

Classification of Scholarship

This research contributes to Applied and Integration/Application Scholarship, as it bridges academic insights with real-world implications. The findings can directly inform corporate sales strategies, leadership training programs, and executive development initiatives, making them highly relevant to both academic researchers and business practitioners.

By reshaping the understanding of leadership interactions in sales, this study provides organizations with actionable insights to enhance both performance and effective leadership development. Ultimately, the research fosters a deeper appreciation for the complexities of sales leadership and offers a foundation for future studies on leadership dynamics in high-performance environments.pact on brand perception while providing a roadmap for ethical and responsible AI adoption in luxury marketing.

Quality Indicators:

  • ABDC Ranking: A
  • JCR Impact Factor: 3.6
  • Google Scholar h-5 Score: NA
  • SciMago h-f Score: 84
  • ABS: Yes
  • Acceptance Rate (as reported in Cabell’s): 35%
  • Indexed By:
    • Cabell’s: Yes
    • EBSCO: No
    • JIF: 35
    • SCIMago: No
    • ERIC: No
    • Westlaw: No
    • LexisNexis: No
    • Ulrich’s: No