Women’s underrepresentation in business-to-business sales: Reasons, contingencies, and solutions

Abstract

Sales faces the second-largest gender gap of any corporate function, with women’s underrepresentation even more pronounced in business-to-business (B2B) sales and at higher hierarchical levels. Concurrently, the call for a more gender-diverse sales force is gaining momentum for social and economic reasons, moving the question of how to attract and promote women in B2B sales to the top of sales managers’ agenda. Using an inductive approach, we uncover male-centricity of communication and job structures in B2B sales as the underlying reasons deterring women from entering and advancing in B2B sales. Specifically, male-centricity implies a misfit between B2B sales and women’s self-conception and needs. By deriving contingencies of these relationships, we offer solutions to women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales by showing, for example, which sales positions are less prone to signal or create a misfit to women and what gender-inclusive resources sales departments can provide and saleswomen can build.

With a significant underrepresentation of women across hierarchies, sales faces the largest gender gap of all corporate functions except supply chain and logistics (Blum, 2020). While the share of sales positions held by women is low in general (35%), it is even lower in firms selling to organizational customers (business-to-business [B2B] sales) and as the hierarchical level rises. Thus, women hold less than 20% of B2B sales leadership positions (Blum, 2018; Shea et al., 2021). This lack of gender diversity in B2B sales is problematic for two reasons.

First, women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales contrasts with socioethical arguments for greater sales force diversity. Socioethical arguments for a higher representation of women in the sales force build on the principle of equal opportunities (Mio, 2006), which posits that all individuals, regardless of gender or origin, should receive equal consideration when filling vacancies and equal opportunities to shape job structures. Relatedly, companies are under increasing legal pressure to adhere to the principles of equal employment opportunity (e.g., the setting of certain gender quotas).

Second, women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales contrasts with economic arguments for greater sales force diversity. These economic arguments center on potential bottom-line benefits from a more gender-diverse sales force, such as higher sales quota attainment and customer satisfaction (Forrester, 2021; Jackson & Joshi, 2004). Specifically, research suggests that customer orientation (Srivastava et al., 2023), job satisfaction (Piercy et al., 2001), and also sales quota attainment, and thus sales productivity and company profits, rise as sales force diversity increases and women lead sales teams (Shea et al., 2021; Shoreibah et al., 2019; Voria, 2018; Xactly, 2019). Thus, a business case for a gender-diverse sales force exists beyond a social justice perspective.

In B2B sales, three trends reinforce the economic importance of a gender-diverse sales force. First, B2B sales faces a significant talent shortage (Manpower Group, 2018), which makes leveraging often-overlooked female talent vital to sales departments’ competitiveness, as failure to attract and retain female talent means revenue losses from inefficient use of scarce but valuable human resources. Second, B2B sales evolves into a consultative, long-term, and shared-value-oriented profession, which increases the importance of strengths linked to female talent, such as empathy, customer orientation, and relationship-building skills (Voria, 2018; Zoltners et al., 2020). Third, while increasingly more women move to senior roles in buyer teams, B2B sales currently fails to mirror this increasing diversity in the buyer landscape (Silverstein & Sayre, 2009), potentially evolving into a competitive disadvantage for selling firms. By contrast, ensuring gender diversity in the sales force may offer a vital benefit in sales pitches and proposals when selling to these increasingly diverse teams.

Surprisingly, although companies are becoming increasingly aware of the importance of increasing diversity in their sales force (CMO Survey, 2021, 2023), corporate actions to fight women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales remain scarce. Symptomatically, a recent report shows that firms invest significantly more in communicating diversity externally than implementing internal measures (Moorman et al., 2021). Given the few actions taken, the share of women in B2B sales is increasing slowly, keeping B2B sales from reaping the benefits of a gender-diverse sales force. One reason for this awareness-action gap may be a lack of knowledge among stakeholders about the success factors for creating workplaces in B2B sales that are more attractive and conducive to women.

Despite the urgency to guide stakeholders in closing the awareness–action gap by informing them on successful approaches to attract and promote women in B2B sales, research on this topic is scarce. Specifically, most studies on diversity in sales date back more than 30 years, leading a recent literature review to conclude that research on diversity in sales has “lost traction in more recent years” (Kitanaka et al., 2021, p. 358). Given the dated and highly fragmented research on this topic (see the literature review section and Web Appendix A for details), extant research leaves stakeholders unclear about what keeps women from entering and advancing in B2B sales and how to address women’s underrepresentation. As a result, prior scholarly insights add little to bridge the prevailing awareness–action gap related to gender diversity in today’s B2B sales. To leverage this research opportunity and answer the call to inform “companies’ efforts to promote inclusion and diversity” (Marketing Science Institute, 2020, p. 12), we examine how stakeholders can increase gender diversity in B2B sales. Specifically, we address two research questions (RQs):

• RQ1 Which gender- and sales-specific barriers exist in B2B sales that keep women from (a) entering B2B sales and (b) advancing to B2B sales leadership?

• RQ2 Which actions are required to (a) position B2B sales as a profession of choice for women and (b) create workplaces in which women can unleash their full potential?

To answer these RQs, we conducted extensive qualitative research comprising in-depth interviews with 60 salespeople across gender, industries, firm types, and hierarchical levels. We augmented these interviews with archival (e.g., diversity metrics in company reports) and quantitative (e.g., prestudy on B2B sales research samples, triangulation survey with university graduates) data. We further substantiated our insights by drawing on established frameworks in organizational psychology.

Our study offers two main insights. First, we provide an in-depth understanding of the specific perceptual and systemic reasons for gender- and sales-specific barriers to women’s entry and advancement in B2B sales. With this, we shed greater light on the theoretical mechanisms explaining why current B2B sales positions in the labor market hinder women’s entry and advancement. Specifically, we reveal that B2B sales labor market communication and job structures largely focus on the needs of men. Such male-centricity creates consequential barriers for (prospective) female salespeople through a (perceived) women–B2B sales misfit. Specifically, male-centricity creates entry barriers for women through a perception-based process, with women reluctant to enter B2B sales because of a misfit between their conception of themselves and their conception of B2B sales (perceived women–B2B sales misfit). Furthermore, B2B sales male-centricity leads to advancement barriers for saleswomen through a performance- and motivation-based process, with saleswomen unable to unleash their potential in the job because job structures in B2B sales do not align with their needs (women–B2B sales misfit).

Second, as the basis for solutions, we provide a nuanced understanding of the contingencies that explain when B2B sales positions are less likely to create gender-specific barriers for women. Specifically, we identify sales position characteristics (i.e., related to the industry, sales role, and incentive schemes) and gender-inclusive resources (i.e., job- and talent-focused) as important contingencies that may reduce barriers for women in that they mitigate the impact of B2B sales male-centricity on a (perceived) women–B2B sales misfit. In doing so, we reveal how the positioning and design of B2B sales positions in the labor market must change to make them more attractive and conducive to women, including a nuanced understanding of the theoretical mechanisms explaining this effect. Notably, as we identify both job- and talent-focused gender-inclusive resources vital to mitigating the detrimental effects of B2B sales male-centricity, we consider the integrative efforts that organizations (e.g., in redesigning incentive systems) and women (e.g., in building psychological capital to cope with the high measurability in sales) can take to foster alignment between B2B sales and women’s needs.

Overall, we enrich the often-scattered approaches to attract and promote women in B2B sales with theory-based and actionable intervention strategies. Specifically, we offer a roadmap for multiple stakeholders (e.g., in employer branding, sales management, or education) to increase women’s representation in B2B sales by ensuring a greater alignment between current labor market communication, job structures, or educational programs and women’s needs.

Review of literature and prestudy

Current state of knowledge on reasons for women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales

A literature review on gender diversity in sales (Web Appendix A) shows that existing work either is dated or does not provide a comprehensive overview of the reasons for and solutions to women’s underrepresentation in today’s B2B sales. Notably, most work addressing diversity in sales dates back over three decades. This decline in research attention is concerning, as the issue of low gender diversity in sales has not lost relevance since then. Thus, while the issue of women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales persists, the reasons for its persistence in the twenty-first century are little understood.

The lack of current insights into barriers to women’s entry and advancement in B2B sales is particularly problematic because the existing work does not consider important changes in both the role of women and the focus of B2B sales as a profession. On the one hand, women have advanced tremendously in education and labor market participation in the last decades (National Center for Education Statistics, 2022). On the other hand, B2B sales as a profession and the role of salespeople have changed significantly since the publication of these articles. For example, sales evolved from a short-term and transaction-oriented activity to a long-term and relationship-oriented profession (Hartmann et al., 2018). Given that these substantial changes are not reflected in older work on gender diversity there is a lack of clarity about the barriers to entry and progression for current female talent in today’s relationship-oriented B2B sales environment.

Concurrently, the limited body of more recent literature (i.e., from 2000 onward) on the topic is subject to three limitations that impede the development of a holistic understanding of the reasons for and solutions to women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales. First, recent studies primarily focus on isolated and external barriers to women’s entry and advancement in sales. These barriers include selective gender biases of sales managers, colleagues, or organizational clients in the evaluation of saleswomen (see Web Appendix A). These studies, however, largely overlook how a (perceived) misalignment between today’s B2B sales and women’s self-conception and needs might deter them from choosing a B2B sales career (i.e., internal entry barriers) and realizing their potential (i.e., internal advancement barriers). Second, these studies do not provide a clear picture of the external barriers either, as they provide mixed results on the presence and strength of gender bias in evaluating female salespeople. Third, the studies remain largely silent on possible contingencies and theoretical mechanisms that may account for such mixed results.

Therefore, more recent research fails to provide an overarching framework to identify which internal and external barriers contribute to women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales. Specifically, the extent to which the low share of women in B2B sales (leadership) results from gender biases in evaluating women (i.e., external barriers) or previously neglected gender differences in the preferences and needs for an attractive and supportive workplace in B2B sales (i.e., internal barriers) remain unclear. Finally, potential interactions between internal and external barriers remain unexplored, though they may also explain the low gender diversity in B2B sales (Kossek et al., 2017).

As a starting point to address these gaps, we conducted a preliminary study to investigate whether a (perceived) misfit exists between today’s B2B sales and women. Specifically, we aimed to test if such a misfit results from a closer alignment of B2B sales characteristics with the needs of (predominantly represented) men than those of women, a phenomenon we refer to as “B2B sales male-centricity.”

Prestudy: B2B sales male-centricity

To test whether male-centricity exists in the job characteristics currently provided in B2B sales, we analyzed study samples used in current sales research to examine whether scientific recommendations for designing sales structures (e.g., incentive systems) reflect implicit gender biases. Specifically, we analyzed the samples used in publications in five major sales and marketing outlets over the last decade (see Web Appendix B for details). The results show that research in B2B sales works with predominantly male samples (70%). While the oversampling of male respondents may reflect the low gender diversity in B2B sales, this heavy representation of men in research may lead to scientific implications that include implicit gender bias. In other words, the needs of (oversampled) men are weighted more than those of (undersampled) women. Notably, such gender biases are also likely in sales department data (e.g., data from employee surveys).

The resulting overemphasis on male salespeople’s needs in (research) data is even more alarming because meta-analyses show that prior research neglects gender as a moderator (Good et al., 2022). Thus, combined with a neglect of potential gender differences in data analysis, the oversampling of men in research samples not only reflects women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales but also might add to its reinforcement. For example, the oversampling of men limits understanding of gender differences in what constitutes an attractive and conducive workplace (e.g., the incentive systems linked to superior sales performance in prior research might be particularly conducive to male but not female salespeople).

Overall, the findings suggest that current job characteristics in B2B sales disfavor women by being more aligned with the needs of men than women (male-centricity of B2B sales). Building on this finding, we conducted qualitative research comprising expert interviews with B2B salespeople to further analyze the characteristics of B2B sales male-centricity and its consequences for women.

Qualitative main study

General methodological approach

Given the paucity of research on gender diversity in marketing and sales and the concurrent prevalence of established theories on gender diversity in related research fields (e.g., organizational psychology), we relied on a theories-in-use approach (Zeithaml et al., 2020), with an extensive qualitative field study at its core. Our approach focuses on theory elaboration, which entails using theory as a supporting framework to develop new conceptual insights through an inductive, qualitative approach (Fisher & Aguinis, 2017). To do so, we blended insights from in-depth expert interviews with salespeople with extant theoretical frameworks in organizational psychology and related literature in sales, diversity, and talent management (see Table C1 in Web Appendix C for an overview of the research process). By combining the principles of inductive (i.e., expert interviews) and deductive (i.e., theories in organizational psychology) reasoning, we ensured that our findings are grounded in prior knowledge of gender diversity in the workplace and best leverage our expert interviews to identify sales-specific insights related to women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales.

Sampling and sample of expert interviews

To shed light on reasons for, solutions to, and contingencies of women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales, we leveraged the personal experiences of salespeople working in B2B sales. We recruited B2B salespeople through three channels: (1) a large social business network, (2) a network dedicated to women in sales, and (3) an extensive network of firms operating in the B2B sector. We included female and male salespeople in our sampling frame to avoid approaching the topic from a gender-biased perspective. We allowed theoretical sampling (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) to direct the data collection process; that is, we selected interviewees by their ability to provide differentiated perspectives on our research topic. Thus, we performed initial data analysis after every 10 interviews and used the insights to identify interviewees who could offer novel views. We stopped data collection upon theoretical saturation (i.e., when subsequent interviews resulted in redundant information).

Theoretical saturation occurred earlier in the male sample, as the personal experiences of female salespeople proved more insightful for understanding women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales. Specifically, while male salespeople’s perceptions of the barriers to women’s entry and advancement in B2B sales substantially mirrored those expressed by female salespeople, the women were able to provide more granular, nuanced, and novel insights into what causes or mitigates these barriers. Thus, the final sample consists predominantly of female salespeople (n = 54), while interviews with male salespeople (n = 6) helped test a potential gender-biased perspective. Overall, our sample size exceeds recommendations for exploratory research (McCracken, 1988) and samples of comparable qualitative work (e.g., Homburg et al., 2014; Ulaga & Reinartz, 2011).

Three aspects of our sample are worth mentioning. First, we achieved a high response rate of 61% despite not offering incentives beyond a study report, indicating our topic’s high relevance to our research population. Second, our sample is highly diverse in terms of industries and firm types, which aligns with our aim to gain insights that hold across sales departments. Third, our sample covers a broad range of experience levels, ranging from interviewees who entered the profession recently (< 5 years) to B2B salespeople holding senior positions (e.g., head of sales). This sample allows accounting for the unique perspectives on women’s entry and advancement barriers in B2B sales across hierarchies. Table C2 in Web Appendix C details the sample characteristics.

Interview design and facilitation

Interviews were semistructured and focused on three core themes related to our RQs: (1) barriers to women’s entry into B2B sales, (2) barriers to women’s advancement into B2B sales leadership, and (3) measures required to mitigate existing barriers. On average, interviews lasted 42 min.

As qualitative research inherently involves the interviewer becoming a cocreator of the data (McCracken, 1988), we carefully designed the interview guide and process to avoid biases (e.g., demand characteristics). After obtaining general information about the interviewees’ personal background (e.g., work experience) and sales department (e.g., department size, industry), we addressed each core theme in our interview guide with broad questions about personal experiences and general views on diversity in B2B sales. Next, we used several probing questions to follow up on specific experiences and views mentioned and to encourage their elaboration. When using such probing questions, we carefully phrased each interview question to prevent active listening (McCracken, 1988) and stated that there were no right or wrong answers and that we were not interested in a particular viewpoint (e.g., a feminist perspective). To carefully elicit elaboration on sensitive topics, we continuously consulted interviewees about whether they would feel comfortable disclosing more information about a sensitive topic (e.g., sexual harassment experiences) and always gave them the option not to do so. Throughout this process, we emphasized that we would keep the data confidential and that there was no way to trace the responses back to the company where they worked. With this, we aimed to create a sense of psychological safety in which interviewees felt empowered to express their opinions without fear of negative consequences. Table C3 in Web Appendix C details the interview guide. Web Appendix D details additional steps taken to ensure the reliability and validity of our interview design and facilitation.

Data analysis and trustworthiness checks

We coded the data with the help of MaxQDA, a software to systematize qualitative data. In line with Strauss and Corbin (1998), we engaged in open, axial, and selective coding. First, we used open coding to identify the main common themes in the data through a detailed analysis of interview findings, which resulted in a coding plan with all applicable codes and illustrative quotes. Second, we used axial coding to connect related information that was fragmented during open coding. Third, when using selective coding, we combined the principles of inductive and deductive reasoning (Good et al., 2021); that is, we constructed coding families by drawing on both interviewees’ responses and additional data (i.e., prestudy results and theories in organizational psychology).

To ensure the trustworthiness of our findings, we took several steps to ensure the objective elicitation and interpretation of interviewees’ responses. Moreover, we applied the principles of investigator and data triangulation. For investigator triangulation, we relied on independent coding by two researchers and reliability testing by a third researcher with no involvement in the study. For data triangulation, we relied on several additional data sources to validate our qualitative findings (i.e., a survey with university graduates, data on B2B sales labor market communication, archival company data, and three management workshops). These trustworthiness checks are consistent with the criteria for assessing trustworthiness proposed for qualitative studies (see Lincoln & Guba, 1985). We detail the applied trustworthiness checks and triangulation approaches in Web Appendix D.

Theoretical background

In line with prior work combining the principles of deductive and inductive reasoning (Elsbach & Kramer, 2003; Good et al., 2021), we drew on two established theories from related research fields to substantiate our findings: lack-of-fit theory (Heilman & Caleo, 2018) and job demands–resources (JD-R) theory (Demerouti et al., 2001). In the following subsections, we present the theories’ main tenets that underpin our conceptual framework to uncover sales-specific reasons for, contingencies of, and solutions to women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales across hierarchies.

Lack-of-fit theory

The lack-of-fit theory is a framework in organizational psychology to understand gender gaps in work environments (Heilman & Caleo, 2018). Central to the theory is the assumption of a mismatch between the attributes society typically ascribes to men and women (gender stereotypes) and careers (career stereotypes). According to the theory, people typically ascribe agentic characteristics, such as assertiveness, competitiveness, and dominance, to men and communal characteristics, such as empathy, caring for others, and people-centeredness, to women (Abele, 2003). These perceptions are often overgeneralized but serve to simplify the environment by explaining how men and women typically are (descriptive gender stereotypes) and how men and women should be (prescriptive gender stereotypes).

Important to our research context, the theory proposes that people tend to ascribe agentic and communal attributes not only to other people (other-stereotyping) but also to themselves (self-stereotyping) and careers (career stereotyping). Thus, people differ in the degree to which they perceive others or themselves as agentic or communal (other- or self-conception) and the degree to which they ascribe agentic or communal characteristics to career options (career conceptions). This, in turn, can lead to a sex-typing of careers: some careers seem more suitable for one gender than others. For example, research shows a strong association between agency and management (Eagly & Karau, 2002), which makes management seem more suitable for men (i.e., agentic) than women (i.e., communal).

Job demands–resources theory

JD-R theory (Demerouti et al., 2001) originates from burnout and occupational stress research. In a business context, the model identifies workplace characteristics that positively or negatively affect health, job satisfaction, and job performance in highly demanding occupations, such as sales (Miao & Evans, 2013; Schmitz & Ganesan, 2014). According to the theory, workplace characteristics can be divided into two main categories: job demands and job resources. Job demands refer to “aspects of the job that require sustained physical or mental effort and are therefore associated with certain physiological and psychological costs” (Demerouti et al., 2001, p. 501). Examples of job demands are time pressure or discrimination by coworkers. Job resources are aspects of the job that help achieve work goals and personal growth (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). An exemplary job resource is social support from supervisors, such as sales managers, in the workplace.

Important to our research context, the theory proposes that job demands and job resources initialize two opposing processes. Job demands initiate a health impairment process that leads to negative personal and organizational outcomes (e.g., reduced well-being or job performance). By contrast, job resources initiate a work engagement process linked to positive outcomes on a personal and organizational level (e.g., increased well-being or job performance). Moreover, the theory proposes that job demands and job resources interact, with demands being particularly detrimental to performance and well-being if resources are low. In other words, job resources can buffer the detrimental effects of job demands.

Conceptual framework, interview insights, and research propositions

Figure 1 illustrates our conceptual framework that blends our qualitative research findings with the theoretical frameworks on which we draw. Specifically, our emerging conceptual framework details why (antecedents and mediating constructs) and when (contingencies) barriers to women’s entry and advancement in B2B sales exist. In what follows, we explain the key reasoning underpinning the conceptual framework as we derive research propositions from the findings of our qualitative fieldwork and its theoretical substantiations.

Fig. 1

Conceptual framework explaining entry and advancement barriers for women in B2B sales

B2B sales male-centricity and its consequences for women

Our overarching conceptual framework is grounded in salespeople’s observation of a greater alignment of current B2B sales job characteristics with the needs of men than women. In our interviews, male and female salespeople consistently noted that B2B sales job characteristics were closely aligned with the needs of men while often neglecting female-specific needs. Specifically, the interviewees observed that a (historical) orientation toward the male sales force currently manifests itself in (1) labor market communication and (2) job structures in B2B sales. We first discuss the adverse effects of male-centric labor market communication in the context of entry barriers for women in B2B sales and then discuss the adverse effects of male-centric job structures in the context of women’s advancement in B2B sales.

Effect of male-centric labor market communication on perceived women–B2B sales misfit

Our interviewees consistently noted that current labor market communication focuses on the needs of predominantly prior generations of male talent. As such, interviewees felt that current communication does not sufficiently address the preferences and needs of a new generation of graduates in general and female graduates in particular. For example, interviewees observed that job ads frequently use masculine wordings (e.g., battlefield metaphors to describe sales tasks). Notably, this observation aligns with the results of a large-scale text analysis of a job portal provider that we gathered for triangulation purposes (see Web Appendix D). Specifically, the text analysis shows that sales ranks second among professions that use the most male-coded wording in job ads (Stepstone, 2021). Beyond such male-centricity in the wordings used, interviews revealed that job ads largely include benefits that focus on what was important to prior, predominantly male generations (e.g., focus on a company car and high commission). Moreover, interviewees identified a strong alignment of listed requirements with men’s experiences (e.g., requiring proof of competitive sports activities or military experience).

Our interview findings revealed that prospective female salespeople primarily rely on labor market communication to form their conception of B2B sales, which they then use to anticipate the degree of fit between B2B sales and themselves (“Is B2B sales a career for me?”). According to many interviewees, the current male-centric communication signals to women that B2B sales is highly agentic (e.g., highly competitive or aggressive) but not communal (e.g., not relationship- or team-oriented). At the same time, interviewees reported that young women often largely draw on socially determined descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotypes (i.e., women are communal and should not be agentic) to form their self-conception. As a result, and in line with lack-of-fit-theory, women’s conception of B2B sales and their self-conception misalign. That is, a perceived women–B2B sales misfit arises.

Reflecting this line of reasoning, several interviewees reported that many young women feel that B2B sales is not a career for them because it lacks elements that are important to them (e.g., relation- and team-oriented business activities) and, at the same time, involves a range of activities that women cannot identify with or do not feel confident in mastering (e.g., tough bargaining with clients, competition with other salespeople). Specifically, the shared experiences of interviewed saleswomen in terms of their own experiences (e.g., thinking back to their younger selves) or observations of others (e.g., conversations with current university graduates) allowed us to identify three levels at which a perceived women–B2B sales misfit arises: job characteristics, competences, and personality.

On a job characteristics level, interviews revealed that a misfit often exists between women’s preferences for communal job characteristics (e.g., teamwork) and their perceptions of purely agentic job characteristics offered in B2B sales (e.g., imaging B2B sales as a “lone-wolf club” with strong me-first mentality). On a competences level, interviews revealed that a misfit often exists between the competences women believe they possess (e.g., perspective-taking) and their perception that purely agentic competences (e.g., toughness, bargaining skills) lead to success in B2B sales. On a personality level, a misfit often exists between the personality traits women identify with (e.g., warm, empathetic) and the personality traits they attribute to a typical B2B salesperson (e.g., “a male tough guy”), which makes them feel as if they do not belong. Table 1 details the levels of perceived misfit, including illustrative interview quotes. In line with the interview findings, we put forth the following proposition (P):

Table 1 Overview of levels of perceived women–B2B sales misfit (before career entry)

P1a

Male-centric labor market communication leads to a misfit between women’s conception of B2B sales and their self-conception. This misfit exists at three levels: job characteristic preferences, competences, and personality.

Effect of perceived women–B2B sales misfit on entry barriers for women

In line with lack-of-fit theory, our interview findings suggest that a perceived women–B2B sales misfit creates entry barriers for women in B2B sales through a perception-based process. More specifically, interviewees noted that many women self-select against a career in B2B sales because they perceive the highly agentic characteristics of B2B sales (as signaled by current male-centric labor market communication) as not fitting their communal preferences, competences, or personality (as they identify with based on gender role socialization). In line with this idea, many interviewees noted that they ended up in B2B sales “by accident” rather than intent, as they had (mistakenly) believed that B2B sales was not a career for them. In other words: Women do not apply for B2B sales since they feel they do not fit in. Thus:

P1b

The greater the perceived women–B2B sales misfit, the higher the entry barriers for women in B2B sales.

Effect of male-centric job structures on women–B2B sales misfit

Regarding current job structures in B2B sales, interviewees consistently reported that job structures have historically been developed to meet the needs of an often exclusively male sales force and thus often do not sufficiently address the needs of saleswomen. Specifically, interviewees noted that job structures in B2B sales often reflect a high degree of agency (e.g., competition, aggressiveness) but a low degree of communion (e.g., teamwork, relationship orientation).

As such, these male-centric job structures misalign with the preferences and needs of interviewed saleswomen.¹ That is, a women–B2B sales misfit arises.

We identified three levels at which such a women–B2B sales misfit arises from male-centric B2B sales job structures: organizational, interpersonal, and task. On an organizational level, interviewed saleswomen consistently reported a misfit between their needs and the job structures B2B sales departments provide. First, they observed a misfit between their own needs and a masculine organizational sales culture that primarily serves the needs of male salespeople. For example, interviewees labeled the current culture as “macho” or a “kill-it culture” (see Table 2 for examples of masculine sales culture artifacts). Second, interviewed saleswomen reported a misfit between the endorsement of long working hours and face time as norms in many B2B sales departments and the obligations they often face for their families (family–sales conflict). This misfit is particularly pronounced for saleswomen with children.

Table 2 Overview of levels of women–B2B sales misfit (on the job)

On an interpersonal level, interviews revealed a misfit between the current male-centric social interaction patterns in B2B sales and women’s needs. First, interviewees observed a misfit between their needs and highly male-centric sales networking events (e.g., events held at sports arenas or even striptease bars outside working hours), leading to the frequent exclusion of women from formal and informal networks. For example, female interviewees shared that they often felt like an “invader to the boys club” by being the only woman attending networking events. Second, they reported frequent experiences of sexism in interactions with clients and coworkers, including sexual harassment, which further reduced their feeling of belongingness on an interpersonal level (see Table 2).

On a task level, interviewees observed that a misfit often exists between women’s needs and the tasks sales managers assign to them. For example, they noted that sales managers tend to assign women sales-support tasks, such as managing the customer relationship management system, rather than client-facing tasks, such as selling to important key accounts (see Table 2). In line with these findings, we propose the following:

P2a

Male-centric job structures lead to a misfit between B2B sales and women’s needs. This misfit exists at three levels: organizational, interpersonal, and task.

Effect of women–B2B sales misfit on advancement barriers for women

In line with JD-R theory, our interview findings suggest that a women–B2B sales misfit creates advancement barriers for saleswomen by limiting their opportunities to develop their full potential. Specifically, interviewed saleswomen reported frequent confrontations with B2B sales job structures that misaligned with their preferences and needs and thus were not conducive to their personal and professional development. For example, interviews showed that a misfit between job structures in B2B sales and many women’s obligations to their families (see Table 2) led to substantial costs at the individual level, including exhaustion and a psychologically draining role conflict between being a salesperson and a mother. Similarly, many interviewed saleswomen noted that the misfit to B2B sales on an interpersonal level (e.g., network exclusion, experiences of sexism) reduced their opportunity to bring their “true selves to work” and, in turn, their commitment to their sales team and organization. Furthermore, saleswomen reported that gender-biased task assignments create a disconnect between women’s responsibilities and what they need to enhance their visibility in the team and further grow personally and professionally.

Thus, the interviews revealed that saleswomen’s misfit to B2B sales translates into barriers to their advancement in sales leadership positions through a motivation- and performance-based process. On the one hand, interviewees observed that this misfit between current B2B sales structures and women’s needs reduces saleswomen’s organizational commitment, job engagement, and performance expectations and, thus, their motivation to actively seek advancement opportunities (i.e., a motivation-based process). Importantly, interviewees noted that these adverse consequences of misfit extend to an increased likelihood of turnover, conceiving a women–B2B sales misfit not only as an advancement barrier driver for women in B2B sales but also as an exit driver. For example, interviewees observed “women turn their back on sales,” as B2B sales departments often fail to create job structures that meet women’s needs on an organizational, interpersonal, and task level. On the other hand, interviews revealed that a woman–B2B sales misfit impedes women’s advancement, as it leads to sales productivity costs such as missed sales quotas (i.e., a performance-based process). For example, interviewees noted that still-prevalent sexism among corporate buyers makes women less likely to close important deals. Similarly, the frequent exclusion of women from internal networks, particularly informal ones, makes women less likely to be considered for internal promotions. Thus:

P2b

The greater the women–B2B sales misfit, the higher the advancement barriers for women in B2B sales.

Gender-inclusive signaling and job resources as contingencies

Our interviews revealed that B2B sales male-centricity creates consequential barriers for women by implying a misfit between B2B sales and women’s self-conception and needs. Against this background, our interviews helped us identify important contingencies of this relationship. As contingencies, we differentiate between gender-inclusive resources provided to prospective saleswomen in the recruitment process before entering B2B sales (signaling resources) and those provided to saleswomen on the job (job resources).

Gender-inclusive signaling resources

We propose that male-centric labor market communication contributes to a misfit between how women perceive B2B sales and how women view themselves (perceived women–B2B sales misfit). To mitigate the relationship between male-centricity and a perceived women–B2B sales misfit, our interviews helped us identify gender-inclusive signaling resources firms can provide to women in the labor market (i.e., when searching for jobs or in the recruitment process). Specifically, we assume that B2B sales male-centricity is less likely to lead to a perceived women–B2B sales misfit if gender-inclusive signaling resources exist that help challenge women’s conception of B2B sales (job-focused signaling) and reconsider their conception of themselves (talent-focused signaling).

Job-focused

While the current male-centric positioning of B2B sales in the labor market generally signals a misfit to many women, interviews revealed that individual firms can weaken this effect by providing job-focused signaling resources that challenge the conception of B2B sales as purely agentic and non-communal and, thus, as not a fit for them. Our interviews reveal that such job-focused signaling goes beyond increasing communion in wordings used in job ads (e.g., the use of relationship metaphors). Individual companies can further mitigate the creation of a perceived woman–B2B sales misfit on the job characteristics and personality levels by adding communal elements in the description of job tasks (e.g., focus on consultative, customer retention activities), claimed benefits (e.g., focus on the importance of teamwork in today’s B2B sales) and the description of an ideal salesperson (e.g., focus on personality traits related to warmness and empathy). Similarly, firms can mitigate the creation of a perceived women–B2B sales misfit on a competence level by listing only competences critical for the sales position to account for women’s reluctance to apply when not meeting all criteria (Table 3). Another important measure that companies can take in this regard is revising sales requirements to allow different experiences as evidence of the suitability of male or female talent for a sales position (e.g., accepting volunteering as proof of high persistence in addition to competitive team sports or military experience; see Table 3).

Table 3 Gender-inclusive signaling resources that mitigate the relationship between B2B sales male-centricity and perceived women–B2B sales misfit

Talent-focused

Interviewees mentioned several pathways to mitigate the effects of B2B sales male-centricity on women by challenging women’s conception of not being a fit for open roles in B2B sales. Specifically, interviewees highlighted the importance of fostering women’s personal (e.g., sales workshops), vicarious (e.g., role models in sales), and educational (e.g., sales courses) exposure to sales to counteract their perception that neither their interests with regard to job characteristics nor their competences and personality match agentic careers such as B2B sales.

Two types of exposure emerged as particularly important contingencies: role models and sales competitions (see Table 3). Interviews revealed that these two exposure types help mitigate the creation of a perceived misfit at all three levels: job characteristics, competences, and personality. Specifically, they help counter women’s perception that their interests, competences, and personalities are or should be communal but not agentic, leading them to believe that they do not fit agentic careers such as B2B sales.

According to the interviewees, these two exposure types play a particular role in mitigating the effect of B2B sales male-centricity on women on all three levels because young women often have little exposure to these in their upbringing and development. Specifically, interviewees noted that women often lack female role models they can identify with, as well as experiences of competition in team-based settings (e.g., football clubs) that combine communion (e.g., teamwork) and agency (i.e., competition and measurability in B2B sales). In line with this reasoning, interviewees noted that even minor touchpoints with female role models (e.g., a saleswoman serving as a role model in a practitioner talk) or team-based competition (e.g., female graduates participating in a sales pitch as part of a university contest) were sufficient for women to reevaluate their potential fit for B2B sales.

Thus, while the current positioning of B2B sales in the labor market tends to signal a misfit to women in general, firms can mitigate this effect by fostering job-focused and talent-focused signaling resources that make women reevaluate their fit to B2B sales. We propose:

P3a

Gender-inclusive job-focused and talent-focused signaling resources weaken the relationship between male-centric labor market communication and a perceived women–B2B sales misfit.

Gender-inclusive job resources

We propose that B2B sales male-centricity contributes to a women–B2B sales misfit on the job, that is, between the job structures provided in B2B sales and saleswomen’s needs. Against this background, our interviews helped us identify the specific gender-inclusive job resources organizations can provide (job-focused) and women can build and cocreate (talent-focused) that can mitigate the relationship between B2B sales male-centricity and a women–B2B sales misfit. In line with this reasoning, our interviews with women who held executive ranks in sales revealed that women’s advancement in B2B sales depends not only on the gender-specific challenges they face but also on the number of resources companies provide and women build to cope with these. Similarly, and in line with the proposed buffer effect of job resources in JD-R theory, saleswomen described B2B sales male-centricity as particularly detrimental to their advancement in the absence of gender-inclusive job resources.

Job-focused

Interviewees revealed job-focused job resources on organizational, interpersonal, and task levels. To mitigate the effect of B2B sales male-centricity on a women–B2B sales misfit on an organizational level, interviewees stressed the importance of several resources, such as an inclusive sales culture that builds on the principles of diversity and inclusion and new work models that include new norms around working hours, flexibility, and balancing private duties and a sales career. On an interpersonal level, interviewees consistently observed that mentors and role models, as well as corporate social support through human resource (HR) departments and sponsors in leadership, play an essential role in mitigating the effect of male-centric interaction patterns on women’s felt interpersonal belongingness. On a task level, interviewees noted the importance of setting up organizational practices to ensure assigning women potential-oriented tasks and providing developmental feedback to counter misalignments between women’s responsibilities and those crucial for their development. Table 4 details the specific gender-inclusive job-focused job resources identified in our expert interviews, including illustrative interview quotes and an overview of sales-specific aspects stakeholders must consider when building such gender-inclusive resources for their sales force.

Table 4 Gender-inclusive job-focused job resources that mitigate the relationship between B2B sales male-centricity and women–B2B sales misfit

Talent-focused

In addition to the resources organizations can provide, interviewees consistently stressed the resources women can build themselves. Specifically, they highlighted the importance of women taking proactive strategies to change job structures to better align them with their needs, thereby ensuring the build-up of talent-focused job resources. The importance of such talent-focused job resources again relates to three levels: personal, interpersonal, and task. On a personal level, interviewees identified psychological capital and career planning proactivity as key resources for women to cope with the male-centricity of B2B sales job structures, thus, ultimately reducing its effect on a women–B2B sales misfit. On an interpersonal level, networking ability and personal social support emerged as key contingencies. For example, these resources help saleswomen penetrate male-dominated networks, which in turn mitigates a perceived misfit on an interpersonal level. On a task level, interviews cited the importance of taking ownership of tasks and proactively asking for more responsibility to counter the male-centricity of task assignments in B2B sales. Table 5 details the specific gender-inclusive talent-focused job resources identified in our expert interviews, including illustrative quotes and pitfalls women need to be aware of.

Table 5 Gender-inclusive talent-focused job resources that mitigate the relationship between B2B sales male-centricity and women–B2B sales misfit

Overall, our findings show that, while the current job structures in B2B sales risk creating a misfit for women, not only firms but also saleswomen themselves can mitigate this effect by building job- and talent-focused job resources that help women better cope with the male-centricity of B2B sales. Thus, we propose:

P3b

Gender-inclusive job-focused and talent-focused job resources weaken the relationship between male-centric job structures and a women–B2B sales misfit.

Interaction of job- and talent-focused resources

Interviews further indicated the incremental value of an interaction between job-focused and talent-focused resources. That is, the moderating effect of gender-inclusive resources is stronger when both job- and talent-focused resources exist, which applies for both the identified job- and talent-focused signaling resources (Table 3) and the job- and talent-focused job resources (Tables 4 and 5). The interviewees offered several insights into why this interaction helps mitigate the effects of B2B sales male-centricity.

Regarding signaling resources, interviewees shared that job-focused signaling often does not contribute to women’s application intent unless talent-focused signaling complements it. For example, job-focused signaling initiatives intended to promote B2B sales as attractive to women are not sufficient to reduce their perceived misfit to B2B sales unless coupled with talent-focused signaling initiatives (e.g., working with female role models as testimonials) that challenge women’s belief that they cannot succeed in B2B sales. At the same time, such talent-focused signaling initiatives have little chance of contributing to mitigate the creation of a perceived misfit to B2B sales among women unless complemented by corresponding efforts of B2B sales departments to change the B2B sales labor market positioning (e.g., changes in the benefits and requirements listed in job ads). Thus:

P3c

Job- and talent-focused signaling resources interact, such that their buffering effect on the relationship between B2B sales male-centricity and a perceived women–B2B sales misfit is particularly strong if both job- and talent-focused signaling resources are high.

Regarding job resources, interviewees shared that job-focused resources often do not contribute to women’s advancement unless talent-focused resources complement them. For example, the job-focused job resources that sales departments provide (e.g., establishing female networks) often add limited value and serve more to tick the “diversity” box if women do not invest time and effort in codesigning such structures to align them with their needs. That is, to mitigate the creation of a women–B2B sales misfit, it is not sufficient for sales departments to provide job-focused resources; women also need to build respective talent-focused job resources to gain the greatest advantage from these. At the same time, initiatives of women themselves to build talent-focused resources have little chance of mitigating the creation of a women–B2B sales misfit unless job-focused resources complement them. For example, women’s activities on a personal (e.g., building psychological capital), relational (e.g., engaging in cross-industry networking), and task (e.g., proactively demanding ownership of key sales territories) level are often quickly stymied if B2B sales departments do not provide a supportive corporate culture (e.g., psychological safety) and infrastructure (e.g., coaching, networking options).

P3d

Job- and talent-focused job resources interact, such that their buffering effect on the relationship between B2B sales male-centricity and a women–B2B sales misfit is particularly strong if both job- and talent-focused job resources are high.

Sales position characteristics as contingencies

Interviews further revealed that certain characteristics of a B2B sales position serve as contingencies of the relationship between B2B sales male-centricity and a (perceived) women–B2B sales misfit. Specifically, interviews showed that while the general male-centricity of B2B sales signals or creates a misfit for women, specific sales position characteristics can weaken or strengthen this effect. Specifically, sales position characteristics that signal or imply high agency (e.g., competition) strengthen the effect, while positions that indicate high communion (e.g., teamwork) weaken the effect. Interviews revealed that such contingencies exist on three levels: industry, sales role, and incentive scheme.

Industry characteristics

On the industry level, the proportion of goods (vs. services) in the portfolio of the selling company and the ratio of men to women in the specific industry emerged as key contingencies. For example, interviewees noted that while male-centric communication and job structures make many women perceive or experience B2B sales positions as unattractive (misfit to their self-conception) or not conducive (misfit to their needs), this tendency is more pronounced if the B2B sales position involves selling goods to a predominantly male customer base (e.g., manufacturing industries). By contrast, the effect is weaker if the position involves selling services in more female-dominated industries (e.g., tourism). Table 6 details rationales and illustrative quotes for sales position contingencies on all levels. We propose the following:

Table 6 Sales position characteristics that mitigate the relationship between B2B sales male-centricity and (perceived) women–B2B sales misfit

P4a

The effect of B2B sales male-centricity on a (perceived) women–B2B sales misfit is weaker in service industries and industries with a predominantly female customer base.

Sales role characteristics

On the sales role level, the share of outside (vs. inside) sales and customer acquisition (vs. retention) activities involved in a B2B sales position emerged as contingencies. Specifically, customer retention and inside sales activities tend to increase the (perceived) communal characteristics of B2B sales (e.g., opportunities for building long-term client rapport and teamwork) and thus mitigate the creation of a perceived misfit to women. Thus, while the current male-centric labor market communication and job structures in B2B sales signal or create a misfit for women in general, this adverse effect is weaker in inside sales roles and when firms focus on promoting and offering more customer retention (vs. acquisition) activities. Thus:

P4b

The effect of B2B sales male-centricity on a (perceived) women–B2B sales misfit is weaker in inside sales roles and roles involving a high share of customer retention activities.

Incentive scheme characteristics

On the incentive scheme level, interviews revealed the share of individual-based (vs. team-based) incentives and high variable (vs. fixed) pay as key contingencies. Regarding individual- versus team-based incentives, interviews indicated that increased transparency and measurability of performance and stimulated rivalry (Homburg et al., 2023) through individual-based incentive schemes (i.e., high agency) strengthen the effect of B2B sales male-centricity. Regarding the share of variable versus fixed compensation, respondents noted that the income uncertainty associated with high variable pay often deters women, who they indicated have a lower tolerance for risk but a higher need for security than men (see Web Appendix E for details on changes in women’s incentive preferences throughout their career). In turn, companies can mitigate the impact of B2B sales male-centricity on women by integrating more team-based incentives and offering a higher proportion of fixed (vs. variable) compensation. Thus:

P4c

The effect of B2B sales male-centricity on a (perceived) women–B2B sales misfit is weaker if salary builds on team-based incentives and the share of variable pay is low.

Gender-biased evaluation of women as contingencies

As our interviews revealed, a (perceived) misfit between women and B2B sales mediates the relationship between B2B sales male-centricity and barriers to women’s entry and advancement. Specifically, such a misfit drives entry barriers through a perception-based process that reduces women’s likelihood to enter B2B sales, while driving advancement barriers through a motivation- and performance-based process that diminishes women’s aspirations and opportunities to advance in B2B sales.

Interviews revealed an important contingency of these relationships: gender-biased evaluation. Specifically, while the mismatch between many sales managers’ prototype of a successful salesperson and their stereotype of women (i.e., women–B2B sales misfit) leads to a reluctance to hire and promote women, interviewees shared that from their experiences, gender biases in the evaluation of women strengthen these relationships. For example, several interviewees reported that highly qualified female applicants and team members were not hired or promoted even though they objectively outperformed their male counterparts.

Two focal types of gender biases in evaluating saleswomen emerged particularly frequently in our interviews: a similar-to-me bias and an (expected) motherhood bias. The similar-to-me bias describes people’s tendency to prefer those with a similar background to themselves (McPherson et al., 2001). In B2B sales, this bias adds to favoritism to hire and promote men, given their similarity to the sales managers currently in power. An (expected) motherhood bias describes negative performance expectations of women with children or assumed family plans (Heilman & Okimoto, 2008). In B2B sales, this bias adds to sales managers’ reluctance to hire, promote, and invest in young women. For example, managers fear negative consequences in the event of motherhood (e.g., having to find a replacement for selling to a critical key account during maternity leave). Moreover, managers implicitly attribute reduced career ambitions to women upon their return (see Table 2 for a discussion in the context of gender-biased task assignment). Thus:

P5

Gender-biased evaluation of (prospective) saleswomen strengthens the relationship between a (perceived) women–B2B sales misfit and women’s barriers to (a) entry and (b) advancement in B2B sales.

Triangulation survey

We conducted a quantitative triangulation survey with female and male university graduates to triangulate our findings on B2B sales entry barriers for women (P1). This study with university graduates served to confirm that our expert interview findings hold for current graduates who have yet to make their career choice. In addition, the study aimed to investigate whether the identified perceived women–B2B sales misfit is indeed greater for female students and hinders women, in particular, from entering B2B sales. Therefore, the objective of the survey was to answer the question: Do female graduates still perceive a misfit between B2B sales and themselves (and more so than their male peers) that makes them reluctant to enter B2B sales upon graduation?

Methodology

Sample

We recruited participants by approaching soon-to-graduate students enrolled at a large university with a dedicated research department focusing on sales (n = 107). To increase our findings’ generalizability, we recruited additional students via a crowdsourcing platform covering various universities without dedicated sales departments (n = 78). Thus, our final sample consisted of 185 students. Students’ average age was 23 years, and 47% were female.

Measurement

Our key dependent variable is the perceived misfit between students’ concept of B2B sales and their self-concept. In line with lack-of-fit theory, we used two core constructs to measure such a perceived misfit: agency and communion (see Web Appendix F for details). We used a dual scale (see Table F1) for agency and communion: one for students’ career concept (how students see B2B sales) and one for their self-concept (how students see themselves). We then calculated the misfit measure for agency and communion by subtracting students’ scores for their career concept from their self-concept. Thus, negative (positive) scores indicate that students believe that they lack (have an excess of) communal and agentic characteristics to succeed in B2B sales. We summed the absolute values of the two misfit measures to obtain an overall misfit measure. In this combined scale, higher scores indicate a greater misfit between students’ B2B sales career concept and their self-concept (regardless of direction), with scores close to zero reflecting alignment.

Main findings

In line with our interview findings, for agency, we found a negative misfit score (Δ_{Self–Career} =  − .51, SD = 1.33; p < .01), suggesting that female students perceive themselves as less agentic than one needs to be in B2B sales. For communion, we found a positive lack of fit score (Δ_{Self–Career} = 1.42, SD = 1.33; p < .01), suggesting that female students perceive themselves as more communal than a typical B2B salesperson. Thus, women perceive an overall misfit between themselves and B2B sales (Δ_{|Self–Career|}= 1.93, SD = 2.06; p < .01). This perceived misfit negatively predicts students’ career choice intent (β =  − .27; p < .01); that is, the higher the perceived women–B2B sales misfit, the higher the entry barriers for women in B2B sales. Moreover, in line with our assumptions, the perceived misfit is greater for women (Δ_{|Self–Career|}= 1.93, SD = 2.06) than for men (Δ_{|Self–Career|}= 1.35, SD = 1.68; p < .05; see Table F2 in Web Appendix F).

Exploratory findings

Drivers of career choice intent

To gain further insight into entry barriers for women in B2B sales, we regressed female students’ career choice intent on their self- and career concept. Regarding their self-concept, we found that those who perceive themselves as agentic are more likely to plan to enter B2B sales (β = .21; p < .05), while linear independence exists between their communal self-concept and their career choice intent (β = .05; p > .05). Furthermore, our findings revealed that female students’ career concept of B2B sales as communal predicts their career choice intent (β = .36; p < .05) while their concept of B2B sales as agentic does not (β =  − .04; p > .05). Importantly, this positive correlation between a communal conception of B2B sales and career choice intent also holds for male students (β = .17; p < .10), suggesting that increasing communion in B2B sales is not likely to result in reverse gender discrimination by reducing male students’ interest in B2B sales.

Educational exposure differences

To determine the role of educational exposure to sales for women’s perceived misfit to B2B sales, we tested for group differences in the perceived women–B2B sales misfit using their enrollment at a sales-dedicated (vs. non-sales-dedicated) university. The results showed that female students enrolled at the university with a sales department perceived a significantly lower misfit (Δ_{|Self–Career|}= 1.45, SD = 1.70; p < .01) than the other students surveyed (Δ_{|Self–Career|}= 2.51, SD = 2.32). Group differences in students’ conception of B2B sales as communal (M_Sales = 4.52, SD = .98; M_Non-Sales = 4.06, SD = 1.19; p < .05) drove this effect. By contrast, no significant group differences emerged in female students’ conception of B2B sales as agentic or their self-conception of either communion or agency (ps > .05; see Table F3 in Web Appendix F for detailed results).

Implications of findings

The results of the triangulation survey lend credibility to our proposition that a perceived women–B2B sales misfit constitutes a key career entry barrier for women, also for current graduates. The findings further help understand the mechanism underlying female students’ reluctance to choose a B2B sales career, which may guide intervention approaches. Most notably, they show that the expected lack of communion in B2B sales (more than the presence of agency) deters female (but notably also male) graduates from choosing a B2B sales career. These findings advocate fostering communion (e.g., by stressing the role of relationship-building and teamwork in B2B sales) as a viable strategy to position B2B sales as an attractive career option for today’s male and female graduates alike. Notably, our exploratory analysis of the role of educational exposure in shaping students’ conception of B2B sales provides initial support for the success of educational intervention efforts in this regard (see the “Practical implications” section for details).

Discussion

Contributions to research

Our study advances research in three major ways. First, we augment the limited research on diversity in sales with a theory-grounded conceptual framework to understand how women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales unfolds and persists. Linking qualitative and quantitative research findings to extant theories in organizational psychology, we develop five research propositions that include testable assumptions about whether, when, why, and which specific barriers to women’s entry and advancement exist. Specifically, we explain how male-centricity—in terms of labor market communication and job structures—ultimately creates barriers to women’s entry and advancement in B2B sales by signaling or creating a misfit between B2B sales and women’s self-conceptions and needs. Against this background, we detail the specific levels of such a (perceived) women–B2B sales misfit (Tables 1 and 2) and identify gender-inclusive signaling and job resources (Tables 3, 4 and 5) and B2B sales position characteristics (Table 6) that mitigate the effects of male-centricity on women. Consistent with an eminent objective of conceptual articles (MacInnis, 2011), we thus build an evidence-based framework that both advances our understanding of the problem at hand (reasons for and contingencies of women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales) and guides the identification of an agenda for future research and practical solutions to women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales.

Second, to our knowledge, we are the first to integrate lack-of-fit theory with JD-R theory and, thus, with diversity in a sales context. Such integrative linking of theoretical approaches from different research disciplines represents a central added value to conceptual and empirical work (Gilson & Goldberg, 2015). Specifically, the integration contributes equally to the theoretical foundation and advancement of the state of knowledge in the newly considered application area (i.e., improving the understanding of gender diversity in sales) and to the development of theories already established in scientific research.

We advance lack-of-fit theory by incorporating the role of gender-inclusive resources in mitigating women’s (perceived) lack of fit to male-dominated functions such as B2B sales. In doing so, we show that jobs need not be male- or female-oriented per se, as even small changes in the design of communication, job structures, and the provision of resources can substantially contribute to making any job more attractive to women. In this regard, we integrate both the supportive resources organizations can provide (i.e., job-focused resources, such as mentorships) with the resources women can build and cocreate (i.e., talent-focused resources, such as building psychological capital). We thus enrich our understanding of the interplay required between the efforts of organizations and women themselves to address the entrenched elements of male-centricity in B2B sales. This integration is novel, given the interdisciplinary divide between research on top-down-oriented job design and bottom-up-oriented job crafting, with most studies focusing on one of these two perspectives (what organizations or women must do; for a discussion; see Kossek et al., 2017). This integration is important because our extension of lack-of-fit theory allows us to move from a focus on curing the consequences of workplaces that do not align with women’s needs to a more strategic and long-term-oriented prevention focus (i.e., establishing collaborations to build resources that impede a (perceived) women–B2B sales misfit in the first place).

We advance JD-R theory by extending its traditional scope (i.e., health psychology) to a diversity and sales context. This extension helps us broaden the scope of our thinking of when and why gender differences in the perception and experience of job characteristics create work environments that are less attractive and conducive to one gender than others. For example, our research propositions include testable assumptions about the industries, sales roles, and incentive schemes in which B2B sales male-centricity is particularly detrimental to women’s sales force participation, well-being, and performance as they strengthen women’s anticipation or experience of a misfit to B2B sales.

As such, our extension of JD-R theory provides an opportunity to advance current sales and diversity research in tandem. Sales researchers can draw on our extension of JD-R theory to better understand how to best structure, manage, and motivate sales teams to ensure that all team members reach their full potential, thereby ensuring the long-term competitiveness of sales departments. Specifically, our extension of the theory can guide sales job design by better aligning job structures with salespeople’s varying inter- and intraindividual needs (e.g., adapting incentive systems to interindividual differences in risk-taking and varying security needs throughout a career). This perspective is important because most research on sales job design implicitly assumes a homogeneous workforce and thus adds little to the question of how to incorporate salespeople’s individual preferences and needs into the design of job structures (Steenburgh & Ahearne, 2012). Relatedly, sales researchers can apply our framework to address entry and advancement barriers for other minorities in B2B sales. From a general diversity perspective, we contribute a framework to understand the underrepresentation of women and other minorities in various business functions.

Third, we respond to Avery et al.’s (2022, p. 15) call for research to continue the “process of unpacking and deconstructing bias in academia.” Specifically, we uncover an important bias in academic research—an implicit gender bias of scholarly guidelines in favor of the needs of men due to an oversampling of male salespeople in research samples (see our pre-study results and Web Appendix B) and concurrent neglect of gender as a moderator in most sales studies (Good et al., 2022). Alarmed by these insights, we urge sales researchers to test whether the implications derived from their studies may add to gender bias in academic research as they do not hold across genders (e.g., by rerunning their analyses with gender as a moderator). Our research takes an important first step in deconstructing such bias by identifying gender-inclusive resources that can mitigate the detrimental effect of B2B sales male-centricity on women—in both practice and research. Relatedly, our findings help unpack other potential biases in sales and marketing research. For example, our findings highlight potential gender biases in evaluating saleswomen. Given that many studies in sales and marketing rely on supervisor-based performance evaluations (for a meta-analytical synthesis, see Verbeke et al., 2011), accounting for such potential gender-specific biases (e.g., by adding objective performance data based on sales quota achievement) is important.

Agenda for future research

Building on our comprehensive qualitative research, we put forth a detailed research agenda with several fruitful starting points for further empirical studies. While the opportunities for further research in this largely unexplored research field are vast, we emphasize the particular need for further studies in seven main areas. The first two research areas focus on better understanding the impact of gender diversity and both (1) sales performance and (2) B2B sales as a function. Specifically, we urge researchers to draw on large-scale cross-industry studies that combine primary and secondary data to investigate how gender diversity affects sales outcomes and reshapes sales roles. Considering the multiple types of sales jobs and building on our initial findings on the importance of sales position characteristics (P4a–P4c), we call for further investigation of (3) sales job characteristics, but also sales team characteristics, as contingencies in these relationships.

Other important avenues of research include (4) in-depth investigations of the long-term effects of our proposed interventions in labor market communication, job structures, and education (see the “Practical implications” section) and (5) an expansion of the literature on incentives in B2B sales to encompass gender diversity and better consider inter- and intraindividual differences in salespeople’s needs. Answering both research questions is important for stakeholders seeking to implement sustainable change.

As gender is only one facet of diversity in sales, we also call for (6) research that explores other dimensions of diversity, such as ethnicity or religion. Last, concurring with Peñaloza et al. (2023) that important differences also exist within gender (e.g., women differ in the degree to which they aspire to agency in future careers) and building on our findings on similarities across genders (e.g., a shared desire for more communal B2B sales characteristics in both men and women), we encourage a more (7) nuanced focus on the differences within gender and similarities between genders. For example, rather than focusing on what differentiates women and men, future research could focus on how communication, job structures, and education can better accommodate the needs of all talent groups alike.

We highlight exemplary research questions in these seven main research areas in Table 7. In doing so, we aim to inspire ongoing research on (gender) diversity in B2B sales to inform and transform scholarship and practice.

Table 7 Research agenda

Practical implications

Our research holds implications for increasing the share of women in B2B sales across hierarchies through organizational, personal, and educational changes. For organizational change, we guide stakeholders in employer branding, sales recruiting, and sales management to better align labor market communication and job structures to women’s needs. For personal change, we offer women a playbook to craft job structures more closely to their needs. We extend these insights for application in academic education. Table 8 details an exemplary roadmap for different stakeholder groups.

Table 8 Roadmap for different stakeholder groups

Implications for employer branding and sales recruiting

Our findings guide employer branding specialists and sales recruiters in developing tailored communication and talent programs that help women consider B2B sales a profession of choice. Our findings emphasize the importance of establishing a continuous development process that (1) monitors potential implicit gender biases in communication (e.g., by performing A/B tests to determine whether job ads equally appeal to male and female talent) or hiring processes (e.g., by using multiple interviewers to test for gender-biased evaluations), (2) corrects such bias and (3) develops gender-inclusive resources to mitigate such bias. As such, we inform stakeholders where potential gender biases in the current labor market positioning of B2B sales might exist and which gender-inclusive signaling resources they can provide to mitigate its detrimental effects on women. Our interviews specifically highlighted the importance of incorporating communal elements into labor market communication and focusing on increasing women’s exposure to female role models and team-based competition when designing talent-focused resources management programs (see Table 3 for details). In this regard, our insights reveal that (4) collaboration with other stakeholders (e.g., sales managers to establish mentorship programs, universities to run university sales contests) is crucial for positioning B2B sales as an attractive career for women in the labor market.

To (5) sustain a truly gender-inclusive recruitment process, stakeholders also need to rethink established paths in talent attraction (e.g., how social media campaigns with female testimonials can increase a woman–B2B sales fit). Similarly, our findings encourage recruiters to rethink established avenues in assessing skills and experiences in B2B sales (e.g., How do the predictors of sales success differ between men and women? How can promotion decisions accommodate women’s career interruptions due to maternity?), which might also involve working on greater permeability of career paths (e.g., Which experiences of lateral entrants from marketing or product management can lead to sales success?).

Implications for sales managers

Our insights guide managers in creating B2B sales job structures that both attract women and support their advancement, from monitoring gender biases in job structures (see Table 2), to providing gender-inclusive job resources (see Table 4), to ultimately sustaining a culture of inclusion and psychological safety that supports women in building talent-focused resources (see Table 5). Table 8 details the five-step approach we propose in this regard.

Furthermore, our findings indicate which B2B sales positions might help mitigate the detrimental effect of B2B sales male-centricity on women, which offers important implications for job design. Drawing on the results of our triangulation survey, we particularly advise sales managers to redesign job structures to make them more communal (vs. less agentic). Importantly, these results suggest that these changes toward more communal job structures equally contribute to increasing the attractiveness of B2B sales for current male graduates, meaning that the required job design is not a matter of increasing the attractiveness for male or female talent, but of increasing the attractiveness of the job for both men and women in today’s generation of talent alike. Actions include situating team-based next to individual-based incentives and increasing the weight of customer retention goals in incentive schemes. Moreover, our findings stress the need to offer more individualized and dynamic incentive schemes that adapt to the varying needs of saleswomen on an interindividual (e.g., general personal risk-taking tendency) and intraindividual (e.g., changing need for security before and upon parenthood) level.

Moreover, our findings indicate which B2B sales positions are particularly prone to strengthen the creation of a woman–B2B sales misfit and thus inform sales managers where providing gender-inclusive resources is particularly critical. For example, our findings indicate that offering bystander training on how to spot sexist behavior of clients toward female colleagues might be even more critical in outside sales in male-dominated industries. Similarly, mentors who provide emotion- or problem-oriented support might be even more important if the sales position involves a high proportion of customer acquisition (i.e., the likelihood of rejection is high) and the salary relies largely on commissions (i.e., salary insecurity is high). Thus, we guide sales managers on a more gender-inclusive job design by offering a roadmap of specific organizational actions and their prioritization (see Table 8).

Implications for saleswomen

Our interviews suggest that sales departments often lack sufficient insight into women’s needs to adjust job structures accordingly, indicating the importance for women to support organizational efforts through personal job-crafting initiatives (see Table 5 for an overview of talent-focused job resources). For example, we encourage women to make sales managers and coworkers aware of their gender-specific needs and collaborate to create gender-inclusive resources (e.g., jointly developing gender-specific training). To ensure a culture in which female salespeople feel empowered to engage in job crafting, our findings imply that saleswomen should encourage each other in this area (see Table 8) and that sales departments should actively nurture such efforts.

Implications for educators

Our interviews and the results of our quantitative triangulation survey show that educators play a key role in challenging prospective women’s conceptions of B2B sales (i.e., by reducing lay beliefs about B2B sales being noncommunal) and of themselves (i.e., by enhancing women’s self-efficacy to succeed in B2B sales). For these approaches to be successful, such efforts should go beyond increasing the number of sales courses, which is low at most universities (Sales Education Foundation, 2020). Rather, educators should increase collaboration with sales departments, enrich classroom learning with experiential techniques, and invest in enhancing the prestige and significance of sales in education and as a career path for women (see Table 8). Our findings point to the two most promising avenues in this regard: fostering women’s exposure to female role models (e.g., by inviting female sales managers for practitioner talks in lectures) and exposure to sales competition (e.g., through team-based university sales contests).

Overall, we offer a sound conceptual framework to understand the reasons for and solutions to women’s underrepresentation in B2B sales. While the potential for intervention is vast, our findings show that easily implemented organizational “silo” interventions have limited impacts on addressing the deeply rooted and historical male-centricity in B2B sales. Instead, shaping a diverse, competitive sales force for the future takes joint efforts by researchers; stakeholders in recruiting, employer branding, sales management, and education; and women themselves. We hope that our research adds to these collaborative efforts.