Cover not available

In:Intersubjectivity in Action: Studies in language and social interaction
Edited by Jan Lindström, Ritva Laury, Anssi Peräkylä and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 326] 2021
► pp. 163–181

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Decision-making in salesperson–customer interaction

Establishing a common ground for obtaining commitment

 | Haaga-Helia University of Applied Sciences
 | University of Toledo
 | Haaga-Helia University of Applied Sciences
Published online: 17 November 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.326.08nie
Abstract
Decisions are often made in a two-part sequence, consisting of a proposal by one party and an aligning response from others. While this sequence is well established, less is known about the preparatory work that may precede it. This chapter studies decision-making in the context of complex service selling. It demonstrates that and how salespeople and a prospective customer collaboratively and incrementally establish a decision over a multi-sequence course of action, in which a sequence implements a stage and the next sequence implements a next step or outcome of the prior stage. Thus, the chapter sheds light on how the groundwork for a proposal is laid. The conversation analytic study is based on 17 video-recorded business-to-business sales meetings in Finland.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Decision-making in business-to-business selling
  • 3.Data
  • 4.The stepwise construction of customer’s commitment
    • 4.1Determining the customer need and a potential solution
    • 4.2Collaborative achievement of an advancement in the business relationship
  • 5.Summary and conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (34)
References
Barnes, Rebecca. 2007. “Formulations and the Facilitation of Common Agreement in Meetings Talk.” Text & Talk 27 (3): 273–296. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Colin, Paul Drew, and Trevor Pinch. 2003. “Managing Prospect Affiliation and Rapport in Real-Life Sales Encounters.” Discourse Studies 5: 5–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clifton, Jonathan. 2009. “Beyond Taxonomies of Influence. ‘Doing’ Influence and Making Decisions in Management Team Meetings.” Journal of Business Communication 46 (1): 57–59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, Andrea L., and John F. Tanner, Jr. 2012. “Transforming Selling: Why It Is Time to Think Differently about Sales Research.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 32 (1): 9–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, Matthew, and Brent Adamson. 2011. The Challenger Sale: Taking Control of the Customer Conversation. New York, NY: Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drake, Veronika. 2015. “Indexing Uncertainty: The Case of Turn-Final or.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 48 (3): 301–318. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, and John Heritage. 1992. “Analyzing Talk at Work: an Introduction.” In Talk at Work. Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. by Paul Drew, and John Heritage, 3–65. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dubinsky, Alan J. 1981. “A Factor Analytic Study of the Personal Selling Process.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 1 (1): 26–33.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawes, Jon M., James T. Strong, and Bernard S. Winick. 1996. “Do Closing Techniques Diminish Prospect Trust?” Industrial Marketing Management 25 (5): 349–360. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa 2004. “Shared Syntax: The Grammar of Co-Constructions.” Journal of Pragmatics 36 (8): 1315–1336. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, Jeffrey D. Robinson, Marc N. Elliott, Megan Beckett, and Michael Wilkes. 2007. “Reducing Patients’ Unmet Concerns: The Difference One Word Can Make.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 22: 1429–1433. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Steven Clayman. 2010. Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond. 2012. “Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions.” In Questions, ed. by Jan P. de Ruiter, 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen. 1994. “Constituting and Maintaining Activities Across Sequences: And-Prefacing as a Feature of Question Design.” Language in Society 23 (1): 1–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and D. Rodney Watson. 1979. “Formulations as Conversational Objects.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by G. Psathas, 123–162. New York, NY: Irvington.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huisman, Marjan. 2001. “Decision-Making in Meetings as Talk-in-Interaction.” International Studies of Management & Organization 31 (3): 69–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huma, Bogdana, Elizabeth Stokoe, and Rein Ove Sikveland. 2018. “Persuasive Conduct: Alignment and Resistance in Prospecting ‘Cold’ Calls.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 38 (1): 33–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaski, Timo, Jarkko Niemi, and Ellen Pullins. 2018. “Rapport Building in Authentic B2B Sales Interaction.” Industrial Marketing Management 69: 235–252. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene. 1996. “On the ‘Semi-Permeable’Character of Grammatical Units in Conversation: Conditional Entry into the Turn Space of Another Speaker.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, 238–276. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. “Collaborative Turn Sequences.” In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, ed. by Gene H. Lerner, 225–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Linell, Per, and Jan Lindström. 2016. “Partial Intersubjectivity and Sufficient Understandings for Current Practical Purposes: On a Specialized Practice in Swedish Conversation.” Nordic Journal of Linguistics 39 (2): 113–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Llewellyn, Nick. 2015. “Microstructures of Economic Action: Talk, Interaction, and the Bottom Line.” The British Journal of Sociology 66: 486–511. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W. 1984. Inside Plea Bargaining. The Language of Negotiation. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mulkay, Michael, Colin Clark, and Trevor Pinch. 1993. “Laughter and the Profit Motive: the Use of Humor in a Photographic Shop.” Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 6: 163–193. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Niemi, Jarkko. 2014. “Two ‘yeah but’ Formats in Finnish. The Prior Action Engaging nii mut and the Disengaging joo mut Utterances.” Journal of Pragmatics 60: 54–74. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Niemi, Jarkko, and Linda Hirvonen. 2019. “Money Talks: Customer-Initiated Price Negotiation in Business-to-Business Sales Interaction.” Discourse & Communication 13 (1): 95–118. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pettijohn, Charles E., Linda S. Pettijohn, Bruce D. Keillor, and A. J. Taylor. 2000. “Adaptive Selling and Sales Performance: an Empirical Examination.” Journal of Applied Business Research 16 (1): 91–112.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., and Harvey Sacks. 1973. “Opening up Closings.” Semiotica 8 (4): 289–327. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schutz, Alfred. 1962. “Common-Sense and Scientific Interpretations of Human Action.” In Alfred Schutz, Collected papers, vol. 1, 3–47. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena, and Heidi Vepsäläinen. 2016. “The Finnish Particle no.” In NU/NÅ. A Family of Discourse Markers across the Languages of Europe and Beyond, ed. by Peter Auer, and Yael Maschler, 243–280. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa. 2012. “Establishing Joint Decisions in a Dyad.” Discourse Studies 14 (6): 779–803. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VISK = Hakulinen, Auli, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen, Tarja Riitta, and Irja Alho. 2004. Iso suomen kielioppi [Comprehensive grammar of Finnish]. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Humă, Bogdana
2025. Preference Organisation and Turn Design as Interactional Resources for Persuasion in Telesales. In Manipulation, Influence and Deception, ► pp. 45 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2025. Persuasion and (New) Contexts of Use. In Manipulation, Influence and Deception, ► pp. 43 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue