Page 106 - 33-3

Goal Consensus, Subordinates’ Prior Performances, and Supervisors’ Resource Allocation Preferences

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics (n = 1,637)
Variables Mean Std. dev. Min Max
0.25 0.20 0.00 1.00
SENIOR i,t
10.30 0.98 0.00 11.70
ADV i,t
0.00 0.18 -0.44 0.71
Ab_SENIOR i,t
0.00 1.53 -4.49 7.67
Ab_ADV i,t
0.74 0.23 0.00 1.00
CONSENSUS i,t
0.30 0.46 0.00 1.00
PERF i,t-1
4.78 0.47 3.00 5.00
REGIONAL_AGE i,t
0.99 0.12 0.00 1.00
REGIONAL_GENDER i,t
8.22 5.44 1.00 26.00
REGIONAL_TENURE i,t
3.87 0.86 2.00 5.00
MGT_AGE i,t
0.84 0.36 0.00 1.00
MGT_GENDER i,t
6.17 4.31 0.08 25.92
MGT_TENURE i,t
13.73 5.76 0.00 18.64
PRICE i,t
14.35 0.24 13.34 15.07
TARGET i,t
4.37 2.69 0.00 18.50
NUM_ENTRUST i,t
7.97 1.11 5.00 13.00
OFFICE_SIZE i,t
11.24 7.43 0.49 28.76
OFFICE_AGE i,t
0.03 0.07 0.00 0.40
TURNOVER i,t
10.76 5.05 1.00 25.00
NUM_BRANCH i,t
4.44 1.94 0.62 8.14
CYCLE i,t
101.10 1.15 99.46 103.02
INDEX i,t

= 0.69). We find that the subordinate’s prior performance (PERF ) is positively related
i,t-1
to Ab_SENIOR (t = 2.70, p < 0.01) but not Ab_ADV (t = 1.47, p = 0.14) in columns (3)
i,t
i,t
and (4) of Table 5. These findings show that after controlling for the known factors that
influence regional managers’ decisions regarding the distribution of senior salespersons
and advertising funding, the closer the goal consensus between the regional and branch

manager, the more likely it is for the regional manager to distribute more than necessary
advertising funding for the branch office and vice versa. In addition, the higher the sales
performance for a branch office, the more likely it is for the regional manager to distribute

more than necessary senior salespersons for the office. These findings suggest that regional
managers use funding to show their support to branch managers who share similar goal
priorities with them, and that they tend to distribute more senior sales personnel to

98