Discrimination Issues in the Selection of Salespeople: A Review and Managerial Suggestions

C. David Shepherd and James C. Heartfield An increasingly litigious society coupled witb complex and dynamic legislation makes avoiding charges of discrimination in selection practices a considerable challenge for the sales manager. Tbe authors identify four problematic areas tbat, if avoided, greatly reduce tbe sales manager's exposure to claims of discrimination in selection. Furtber, recommendations are made for a proactive approacb to nondiscrimination.
Sales managers are often required to make decisions that could be construed as discriminating against certain individuals or groups. Consider the following situation. A sales person resigns without notice. The sales manager must quickly find a replacement. As a result, the manager solicits recommendations from the existing sales force for a replacement. An ideally suited candidate (who happens to be white and male) is recommended by several salespeople. The sales manager is very pleased with this selection as he fits in well with both the existing sales force (predominantly white males) and the customer base (also predominantly white males). Without any intent to discriminate, this sales manager has opened his company up to the very real possibility of adverse legal action. In spite of the fact that most firms use employee referrals in searching for new salespeople ("Recruiting and Selection Procedures" 1988), this sales manager's practice of only seeking references from a white male dominated sales force would be considered disC. David Shepherd received his Ph.D. in Marketing at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. He is currently an Assistant Professor at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. His experience includes over five years in sales and sales management with the Burroughs Corporation. Dr. Shepherd has published in the Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, the International Journal of Manpower, the proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science and the American Psychological Association. His primary area of interest is sales force management, with a particular focus on expertise and ethics in personal selling. James C. Heartfield received his Juris Doctor at the University of Mississippi and his undergraduate degree at Louisiana State University. He is currently an attorney with the law firm of Stophel & Stophel, P.C.in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Mr. Heartfield has published in the Tennessee Bar Journal and the National Journal for Christian Educators. His law practice focuses primarily on corporate, labor, and bankruptcy law with particular interests in employer/employee relationships, commercial transactions, mergers and acquisitions.

criminatory as it tends to limit the hiring of minorities (Dee 1987). The number of federal suits alleging workplace discrimination is staggering: 7,613 suits in 1989 as compared to only 336 in 1970 (Wynter 1991). Although parts of the selection process, such as interviewing or reference checking, are often handled by personnel specialists, the final hiring decision is invariably left up the sales manager (Churchill, Ford and Walker 1990). Sales managers must therefore understand the legal implications of any selection practice that may be considered discriminatory. Although several studies in the law and personnel management fields have investigated aspects of discrimination in the selection process (for examples see. Kohl, Stephens, and McCauUey 1986; Miller 1981; Lowell and Deloach 1982), little research exists specifically addressing the challenges inherent in the nonpreferential selection of salespeople. The purpose of this paper is to provide the sales manager with the basic information needed for a comprehensive orientation to nondiscriminatory selection practices. To that end we will overview four problematic areas in the selection process. The managerial implications of a proactive strategy that avoids these troublesome areas will then be discussed. To facilitate this discussion we will first review several fundamental terms and concepts underlying discrimination legislation.

The Terminology and Concepts Underlying Discrimination Legislation

To discriminate is "to make a difference in treatment or favor on a basis other than individual merit
Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Volume XI, Number 4 (Fall 1991).

68

Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

Table 1 Legislative Acts Impacting the Saies Force Selection Process* Act Civil Rights Act of 1866 Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) Age Discrimination in Employment Act (1967) Rehabilitation Act of 1973 Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Act (1974) Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) Purpose To give blacks the same rights as whites Prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, or sex (including pregnancy, childbirth, or abortion) in employment Prohibits discrimination based on age Application Extended by courts to include all ethnic groups All employers who have interstate commerce and have 15 or more employees working at least 20 weeks out of the year Protects individuals between the ages of 40 and 70 Any firm employing 50 or more employees and seeking federal contracts over $50,000. Any firm holding federal contracts over $10,000. Beginning July 26, 1992 applies to all employers with 25 or more employees. Extended July 26, 1994 to include employers with 15 or more employees

Requires an affirmative action pian to hire handicapped persons Requires affirmative action plan to hire Vietnam veterans and disabled veterans of any war Prohibits discrimination based on handicaps or disabilities (either physical or mental)

Derived from Ingram and LaForge (1989)

(Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 1991)." According to federal statutes, discrimination may take the form of disparate treatment (discrimination against an individual) or disparate impact (discrimination against a particular class of people). It should be noted that an employer may be guilty of discrimination resulting from disparate impact without any intent to discriminate. Federal statutes prohibit discrimination based on age, race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. In addition, federal statutes prohibit discrimination against veterans or those physically handicapped. In other words, federal statutes have made these groups "protected classes." For a summary of existing and pending federal antidiscrimination legislation see Table 1. Although the focus throughout this discussion is on federal legislation, sales managers should also be aware that several states have enacted discrimination legislation that is often more restrictive than the associated federal legislation. When an applicant alleges discrimination against an employer, the employee must show that s/he: (a) is a member of a protected class, (b) has applied for the vacancy and is qualified for the job, (c) although

qualified was rejected, and (d) that after that rejection the employer continued to seek applications from persons of equal qualifications (Dee 1987). Often, a statistical imbalance created by the absence of a protected class in a particular job category is enough to establish discrimination. For example, if the selection rate of a protected class is less than 80% of the selection rate for the remaining applicants, the courts have held that discrimination exists in the form of disparate impact (Sovereign 1989). Again, this statistical imbalance establishes discrimination regardless of any intent on the employer's part to discriminate. In response to such claims of discrimination, employers must be able to show that all questionable aspects of the selection process are job-related and, therefore, not illegal. For example, a statistical imbalance is not discriminatory if the position has been widely advertised and few members of protected classes have applied for the position. Traditional defenses against discrimination charges include "business necessity," "bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ)" and "job-related validity." The courts have been extremely narrow in their inter-

Fall 1991

69

pretation of the first two of these two defenses. In almost all cases, business necessity has only been allowed as a defense when it has been deemed necessary to protect the safety of workers or customers. For example, the business necessity defense has been used, with mixed results, to defend a mandatory retirement age for airline pilots and police (Sovereign 1989). BFOQ defenses imply that "no person of a particular sex, race, color, religion, or national origin can adequately perform the given job (Gatewood and Feild 1990, p. 37)." For example, the BFOQ defense has been used to justify sex or religious discrimination in situations such as the hiring of restroom attendants and church ministers. The job-related validity defense requires the employer to provide objective information that substantiates a relationship between a worker characteristic and successful job performance. Whenever an employer attempts to make such a case, s/he should have strong empirical evidence supporting its claim. For example, in one case the court ruled against a company when it refused to hire females based on purely subjective evidence that its South American clients would not deal with female sales representatives {Fernandes v. Wynn Oil Co. 1982). In essence, to successfully use the business necessity, BFOQ or job-related validity defenses, the employer must show that no other acceptable altemative is available that will serve the employer equally well, and has a lesser impact on members of protected groups (Sovereign 1989). In emplo3Tnent situations where protected classes are severely under-represented, employers often establish affirmative action plans as remedial measures designed to facilitate equal treatment in the hiring and promotion of employees. In some situations (see Table 1) such affirmative action plans are required in order to do business with the govemment. Of course, plans that focus on hiring protected classes may pose a form of reverse discrimination against members of a nonprotected class, such as white males. Although the matter is not completely resolved, the U. S. Supreme Court has allowed such reverse discrimination while an affirmative action plan is in effect (Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation v. Weber 1979). However, the purpose of an affirmative action plan, and antidiscrimination law in general, is not to force employers to hire less qualified applicants, but rather, to allow employers to make a good faith effort to find qualified applicants from the ranks of protected classes (Sovereign 1989).

Selection Practices That Often Lead to Charges of Discrimination

Discrimination in employment is often discussed by producing a list of acceptable and unacceptable behaviors associated with each step in the selection process. Although such lists can be very valuable and offer considerable insight, they offer little guidance for the sale manager when confronted with unique selection situations. As a altemative approach, we will now discuss four problematic areas that, if avoided, greatly reduce the sales manager's exposure to claims of discrimination in selection.

Inform,ation Given
The sales manager must be very circumspect in the information s/he provides conceming job openings. Opportunities abound for the sales manager to use terminology that suggests a preferred race, age or sex in publicizing or discussing employment openings. The use of newspaper advertisements to publicize job openings is perhaps the most notable of these opportunities. In fact, a study of national newspapers found that over 2% of the advertisements were blatantly discriminatory in nature (Kohl, Stephens, and McCaulley 1986). For example, the word "salesperson" should be substituted for the word "salesman" unless the company can empirically demonstrate that sex is a BFOQ for the job. As BFOQs are very difficult to prove, it would be advisable to simply avoid using such terminology. In other words, the advertisement should contain only requirements, or preferential statements, that can be objectively justified as job related. Of course, the same principle applies in any situation in which the sales manager is discussing the job opportunity (i. e. internal job opportunity postings, discussions with internal or external recnoiters, and discussions with potential job candidates).

Sources of Candidates
Discrimination charges can also be fostered by the sources sales managers use to recruit potential job candidates. Companies often look internally for their source of salespeople. Employees in other departments are particularly good candidates for sales positions as they bring with them an established performance record and a knowledge of the company and its policies, both of which help reduce training time. Further, as in the opening scenario, current employees, especially salespeople, are a good

70

Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

source of referrals of candidates from outside the company. In essence, there is nothing legally wrong with selecting salespeople from within the company or from referrals from existing employees. However, discrimination exists if such approaches limit hiring from protected classes. For example, the opening scenario illustrated that employees tend to recommend candidates from a common ethnic group. To protect against discrimination charges, such recruiting practices need not be eliminated, only supplemented with other approaches that will reach protected classes. Other major external sources of sales candidates include employment agencies, educational institutions, career conferences, and professional societies ("Recruiting and Selection Procedures" 1988). Care should also be taken in the use of each of these alternatives. Certain employment agencies tend to discriminate against protected classes. Further, few members of a protected class may be represented at career conferences or found in certain educational institutions and professional societies. Again, the best policy would be to select recruits from several different sources and seek avenues that allow communication with the protected classes. For example, recruiting on campuses of minority dominated universities is a good approach to avoiding discrimination charges. In any contact with external sources, the sales manager should stress his/ her desire to promote equal opportunity in the selection process.

Information Requested
It is advantageous for the sales manager to know as much about the candidate as possible before a hiring decision is made. To obtain this information sales managers often rely on application forms, reference checks, and interviews. However, in the use of each of these approaches care must be taken to avoid any hint of discrimination. Problems often arise when the information requested does not appear to be job-related and offers the possibility of discrimination. For example, in a typical sales situation the inclusion of a question conceming sex or marital status on the application form, coupled with a small number of females in the sales force, gives a strong indication of discrimination against females (for more detail on inappropriate questioning on application forms see Burrington 1982; Miller 1981; Lowell and Deloach 1982). As even the most structured interview will contain some extemporaneous elements and spontane-

ous follow-up, it is often difficult for the sales manager to avoid comments that may seem discriminatory. However, such comments can be minimized by: (a) proper planning, (b) a focus on job related questions, and (c) the use of direct questions. Proper planning includes carefully reviewing the job description and the job qualifications, as well as reviewing all material available conceming the applicant. Often a resume or reference letter will provide the answers to questions such as age, marital status, etc. Further, a focus on job related questions will reduce the tendency for the sales manager to stray into questionable areas that may lead to discrimination charges. Finally, asking direct questions also limits the possibility of discrimination. For example, as salespeople are often required to travel extensively, or relocate, there may be a tendency to lapse into a series of questions concerning a female candidate's marriage plans, family planning, or desire for a spouse or children. Such questions are both inappropriate and inefficient in getting at the desired information. Instead, it would be more appropriate and effective to simply: (a) state that extensive travel and possible relocation are requirements of the job, and (b) ask if any conditions exist that may limit the applicant's ability to travel or relocate. Again, the key to non-discriminatory information gathering is a focus on job-related questions. In addition, a review of the federal statutes, court cases and relevant literature identifies certain questions that should be avoided. For example, as our legal system assumes innocence until guilt is proven, questions conceming arrest (without conviction) are never appropriate in the selection process (.Gregory v. Litton Systems 1972). Table 2 lists a series of questions that, in most circumstances, sales managers should attempt to eliminate from application forms, as well as avoid in interviews and reference checks.

Selection Criteria
Gone are the days when a sales manager could base a hiring decision based on a "gut feeling" or wholly subjective criteria. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 stresses that the selection process must be based on objective criteria (Dee 1987). As a minimum requirement, the sales manager should have a written list of objective job qualifications for any positions to be filled. These objective qualifications must be: a) independently measurable, b) jobrelated, and c) predictive of performance. The use

Fall 1991

71

Table 2 Sensitive information Request Information Concerning 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Arrests? Convictions? Age? Height and Weight? Marital Status? Absolutely barred Include a statement indicating employer will consider the nature and circumstances of the conviction Although not barred, be prepared to give a good reason for this question May discriminate against females, or Americans of Asian or Spanish descent (BFOQ needed) Illegal unless requested of both sexes and only then when employer has a no-spouse hiring rule. (Some states consider married persons a protected class, prohibiting this question) In light of the ADA, such questions should only be included when necessary for the job The propriety of asking about educational background is determined by the level of education required for the job Both questions are suspect as the bankruptcy code discrimination against individuals who have filed bankruptcy prohibits Comments/Recommendations

6. 7. 8. 9.

Physical Characteristics? Education? Bankruptcy, Garnishments?

Disabilities, Handicaps and Health Problems? 10. Citizenship? 11. Friends and Relatives?

Instead of asking questions such as these, simply ask if any condition exists that limits the candidate's ability to perform job-related functions To avoid discrimination charges under the Immigration Reform and Control Act, it is best to avoid citizenship questions Improper if it perpetuates an imbalance in the make-up of the work force

of pre-employment testing of mental abilities and personality traits (e.g. intelligence, aptitude and personality tests) illustrates these principles. Although such tests have been shown to be excellent tools in the selection process (Hunter and Hunter 1984), they are only allowable if the ability or trait can be empirically shown to be job-related and predictive of performance. This assessment should be done through validation studies grounded in a thorough knowledge of the job in question and the relevant statistical procedures. As a result, the validation of selection tests requires a close working relationship between the sales manager and the personnel department or an outside consultant (for more detail on validation of testing see. Principles for the Validation and Use ofPersonnel Selection 1987). Pre-employment medical screening poses a similar challenge for the sales manager. It is not advisable to continue to use a standard physical examination for all positions. The physical examination, as all elements of the selection process, should focus on the requirements of the job. The examining physician should be advised conceming the re-

quirements of the job in question. For example, in many sales positions, conditions such as diabetes or epilepsy may have little or no impact on the candidate's ability to perform. Therefore, questions concerning such conditions should be avoided, and any information collected for emergency situations should be kept confidential (in a separate file and divulged in only need-to-know situations). In fact, under the new guidelines of the ADA, a physical examination should only be performed after an offer of employment is extended ("Americans With Disabilities" 1990). Moreover, the offer of employment cannot be conditioned on the results of the physical examination unless all entering employees are subjected to the same physical examination and if the physical examination is treated as a confidential medical record. Obviously, the sales manager needs a thorough knowledge of the requirements of the job in question to avoid discriminatory behavior. The sales manager is on the safest ground if all job qualifications are derived from written job descriptions which define the specific tasks, duties, and responsibilities in-

72

Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

volved in the sales positions to be filled (Ingram and LaForge 1989). A thorough job description makes the recruiting and selection process much easier for the sales manager. First, it helps identify the qualifications that are required for the job, reducing the sales manager's need to rely on undocumented subjective criteria. Second, it implies that the manager is attempting to comply with antidiscrimination legislation.

Implications and Recommendations

As the preceding discussion suggests, totally avoiding discrimination in the selection process is a very difficult, if not impossible, task for the sales manager. Discrimination legislation is both complex and dynamic. In addition, many rejected candidates may find it easier to attribute their rejection to discrimination than to a lack of qualifications. In accepting the difficulty of this task, three overriding questions emerge. First, how should the sales manager proceed? Second, what organizational factors are necessary for the development of a nondiscriminatory selection program? Finally, how can researchers contribute to the reduction of discrimination in selection?

5. Are candidates from protected classes being reached by the current sources of recruits? 6. Are all questions asked of the applicant jobrelated (including application form, interview, medical questionnaire, testing, etc)? 7. Have all selection tests been validated? 8. Is the terminology used in all job advertisements, postings, etc. nonpreferential? 9. Are protected classes under-utilized in the make-up of the current sales force? The result of this audit will be a heightened awareness of the current situation under which the sales manager must operate.

Organizational Factors
Support. The approach the sales manager takes to rectify any shortcomings that are identified in the audit will undoubtedly depend on the level of personnel support available. In a large firm the sales manager may simply turn any identified shortcomings over to internal or external personnel specialists. Unfortunately, in many small and medium size firms, such support may be non-existent. In these situations the sales manager should notify management of the problem area and, if possible, personally address the shortcoming. For example, sales managers will often find that job descriptions are either severely dated, inaccurate or non-existent. The ideal approach to rectifying this shortcoming would be to allow a trained personnel specialist to conduct a thorough job analysis and write a job description (with input from the sales manager). However, when this is impractical the sales manager should personally write a job description based on his/her own knowledge of the job, along with insights gleaned from other salespeople in similar positions. Of course, the typical sales manager does not possess the time or the expertise to adequately address many other aspects of selection. For example, the validation of selection tests usually requires considerable statistical knowledge, while the creation of an acceptable affirmative action plan would require an in-depth knowledge of discrimination legislation. In these situations all the the sales manager can effectively do is to provide management with a written notification of the problem along with a request for management attention. In fact, the support of upper management is fundamental to the success of a nondiscriminatory se-

The Sales Manager

The sales manager should take a proactive stance to avoid the likelihood of legal proceedings, as well as provide his/her company with a strong defense should discrimination charges arise. A proactive stance implies that instead of simply reacting when a job vacancy occurs, the sales manager approaches recruiting and selection as an on-going process. As a first step the sales manager should audit the current selection procedures by asking the following questions: 1. Is there a current, written job description and statement of job qualifications for all jobs under his/her supervision? 2. Do the job descriptions and qualifications clearly specify the requirements of the job in objective terms that are measurable and job-related? 3. Have the job descriptions and qualifications been reviewed by all participants in the staffing process? 4. Are multiple methods for identifying recruits being used?

Fall 1991

73

lection program. First, upper management must stress that nondiscrimination is a priority. Much like a code of ethics, a written policy of nondiscrimination in hiring should be circulated throughout the company. To further instill a commitment, as well as the knowledge required for such a policy, management must first train, then evaluate and reward sales managers for nondiscriminatory behavior. Training. Boedecker, Morgan and Stoltman (1991) point out that there is little evidence that sales training programs incorporate legal issues. Although little research exists to describe the content of sales management training programs, it seems safe to assume a similar situation. Given the cost (in terms of time, money and reputation) of a discrimination suit, and the complexity and dynamic nature of discrimination legislation, sales management should be receiving comprehensive and on-going tradning to cope with this issue. A suggested approach to training would combine on-going individual self study combined with periodic group sessions. The individual self study would be designed to acquaint the sales manager (or potential sales manager) with the fundamental elements of discrimination legislation and its relationship to the selection process. The periodic followup group training class would be used to reinforce the principles covered in the self study. More importantly, the group setting would allow the use of experience building techniques such as vicarious role-play (see Leigh 1987; Szymanski 1988). For example, sales managers could be assigned the role of interviewers or candidates in a mock job interview. One approach to planning these role play sessions involves a modification of the generic script methodology (Leigh 1987; Leigh and McGraw 1989). In this application the methodology would be used to collect generic scripts of sales candidates' interviews instead of sales situations. These generic scripts would then be used to "set the stage" for the role play situations to allow the mock interview to refiect real situations and highlight common problematic areas. Upon completion of each role play session, the participants and observers should discuss any of the interviewer's comments which may have been construed as discriminatory. Evaluation and Rewards. It seems inconsistent to expect sales managers to spend considerable time improving selection procedures if their evaluation and reward structure hinges solely on sales volume. Sales managers should be evaluated and

rewarded for recruiting and hiring qualified candidates from under-represented protected classes. In addition, salespeople should be rewarded for recommending qualified candidates from such underrepresented groups. The basic concept is that the desired behaviors should be evaluated and rewarded. The rewards need not all be extrinsic monetary rewards. As suggested by Ingram, Lee and Skinner (1989), informal recognition or praise also serves as valued reward. A lack of feedback poses a problematic area in evaluating the actual behavior of sales managers in the selection process. Unfortunately, a discrimination charge may be the employer's first notice that a sales manager is using discriminatory procedures in the selection process. To increase feedback, firms should consider systematic polling of previous candidates for any indications of discriminatory behavior. One approach would be to give all candidates a confidential mail questionnaire to be returned at the end of the selection process. This questionnaire could probe for any impressions or blatant examples of discrimination. Although some of these discriminatory impressions may be ungrounded, the goal should be to eliminate such occurrences. As suggested by Boedecker, Morgan, and Stoltman (1991), sales managers could be assigned a complaint "quota" that should not be exceeded. This approach would provide feedback for the sales managers and also provide an excellent tool for management to use in evaluating the discriminatory behavior of sales managers.

The Sales Force Researcher

How can the researcher contribute to a reduction in discrimination in the selection of salespeople? Clearly, a research agenda can be developed aroumd this question. Of course, descriptive work is needed to clarify issues such as: a) the level of discrimination found in the current selection practices of sales managers, b) the level of knowledge possessed by sales managers conceming discrimination, c) the current training sales managers receive conceming this subject, and d) the existence of evaluation and reward programs which emphasize nondiscrimination issues. However, at a more fundamental level conceptual research is needed. Currently, no model of discrimination in selection exists in the sales force literature. Although it intuitively appears that factors such as a lack of knowledge or a lack of management

74

Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management

emphasis may lead to discriminatory behavior, a model is needed to focus research on the antecedents and consequences of discrimination in selection. For example, one of the consequences of discrimination is litigation. Identifying the factors contribute to the sales candidate's decision to pursue a discrimination case wovild be an interesting research question. In fact, this would appear to be an interesting application of attribution theory similar to Folkes (1984) work with consumer reaction to product failure. Although we would like to reduce all discrimination in selection, attribution theory may highlight certain practices that lead to high levels of litigation. Clearly, the current discussion of discrimination needs to be expanded to include all aspects of discrimination in the workplace. In a broader sense, researchers should also focus attention on explicating the myriad of legal issues that impact both salespeople and their managers. For example, in a recent case (Holmes v. Carroll Air Systems, Inc. 1988), an employer was held liable for the drunkdriving of a salesperson involved in the off-premises entertainment of clients (Hayes 1991). This court decision underlines the need for guidelines concerning the legal implications of client entertainment. Finally, researchers should be circumspect to include a discussion of the legal implications of their research. For example, in a recent study, Tsalikis, DeShields and LaTour (1991) concluded that presenters speaking in the standard accent of the audience evoke more favorable judgements from the audience. Some may interpret this conclusion to imply that salespeople should be recruited from the same ethnic or regional groups as their customers. However, similar to the earlier discussion of hiring based on employee referrals, this practice may perpetuate an imbalance in the make-up of the work force and, therefore, be discriminatory. By noting such legal implications in our research, such concerns may be highlighted.

which the candidates are recruited, c) the information that is requested from the candidate, and d) the selection criteria. To reduce exposure to claims of discrimination, and to provide a sound defense if such claims arise, the sales manager should take a proactive approach to nondiscrimination in selection. This proactive approach begins with an audit of the current selection procedures. Of course, any shortcomings that emerge from this audit should be addressed by the sales manager with support from upper management. This managerial support should also include training, evaluation and reward programs that encourage nondiscrimination in selection.

References
"Americans With Disabilities Act: Get Ready for Some Big Changes," (1990) The Tennessee Employment Law Update, Vol. 5, John B. Phillips, Jr. ed., (October), 1-5. Boedecker, Karl A., Fred W. Morgan, and Jeffrey J. Stoltman. (1991), "Legal Dimensions of Salespersons' Statements: A Review and Managerial Suggestions," Journal of Marketing, 55 (January), 70-80. Burrington, Debra D. (1982), "A Review of State Government Employment Application Forms for Suspect Inquires," Public Personnel Management, 11, 55-60. Churchill, Gilbert A., Neil M. Ford, and Orville C. Walker, Jr. (1990), Sales Force Management, Homewood, IL: Irwin. Dee, Christopher (1987), "Disparate Impact and Subjective Employment Criteria under Title VII," The University of Chicago Law Review," 54, 957-979. Fernandes v Wynn Oil Company {1982), 653 F. 2d 1275 (9th Cir.). Folkes, Valerie S. (1984), "Consumer Reactions to Product Failure: An Attributional Approach," Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (March), 398-409. Gatewood, Robert D. and Hubert S. Feild (1990), Human Resource Selection, Chicago: The Dryden Press. Gregory v. Litton Systems (1972), 472 F. 2d 671 (9th Cir.). Hayes, Arthur S. (1991, August 27), "Drunk-Driving Liability Widens For Employers," The Wall Street Journal, pp. BlB2. Holmes v. Carroll Air Systems, Inc. (1988), 523 So. 2d 164 (D.C FLA.). Hunter, John E. and R. F. Hunter (1984), "Validity and Utility of Alternative Predictors of Job Performance," Psychological Bulletin, 96, 72-98. Ingram, Thomas N. and Raymond W. LaForge (1989), Sales Management: Analysis and Decision Making, Chicago: The Dryden Press. , Keun S. Lee, and Steven J. Skinner (1989), "An Empirical Assessment of Salesperson Motivation, Commitment, and Job Outcomes," Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 9 (Fall), 25-33. Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation v. Weber (1979), 443 U.S. 193. Kohl, John P., David B. Stephens, and Gerald McCaulley (1986), "Questionable Advertising Practices by Business Firms: Result of a National Survey of 'Help Wanted' Ads," Labor Law Journal, 37, (Sept) 660-667.

Summary
An increasingly litigious society coupled with complex and dynamic legislation makes avoiding charges of discrimination in selection practices a considerable challenge for the sales manager. Our discussion has identified four problematic areas that often lead to charges of discrimination: a) the information given conceming the job, b) the sources from

Fall 1991

75

Leigh, Thomas W. (1987), "Cognitive Selling Scripts and Sales Training," Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 7 (August), 39-48. Leigh, Thomas W. and Patrick F. McGraw (1989), "Mapping the Procedural Knowledge of Industrial Sales Personnel: A Script-Theoretic Investigation," Journal of Marketing, 53, (January), 16-34. Lowell, Richard S. and Jay A. Deloach (1982), "Equal Employment Opportunity: Are You Overlooking the Application Form?" Personnel, 59, 49-55. Miller, Ernest C. (1981), "An EEO Examination of Employment Applications," Personnel Administrator, 25 63-77. Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures (1987), College Park, MD: Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc. "Recruiting and Selection Procedures", Personnel Policies Forum Survey No. 146, (May 1988), 7-9.

Sovereign, Kenneth L. (1989), Personnel Law, Engelwood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall. Szymanski, David M. (1988), "Determinants of Selling Effectiveness: The Importance of Declarative Knowledge to the Personal Selling Concept," Journal of Marketing, 52 (January), 64-77. Tsalikis, John, Oscar W. DeShields, Jr., and Michael S. LaTour (1991), "The Role of Accent on the Credibility and Effectiveness of the Salesperson," Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 11 (Winter), 31-41. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (1991), Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster,Inc. Wynter, Leon E. (1991, August 22), "Would Rights Bill Boost Volume of Job Suits?" The Wall Street Journal, p. BI.