Vol. 11 No. 1 (2023): Business & Management Studies: An International Journal
Articles

Metaphors perception in personal sales concept: Evaluation with logistic regression

PDF (Türkçe)
  • Selva Seza CANDAN,
  • Seliha Seçil BAYRAM
Selva Seza CANDAN
Dr., Karabuk, Turkiye
Seliha Seçil BAYRAM
Assist. Prof. Dr., Karabuk University, Karabuk, Turkiye
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v11i1.2204

Published 2023-03-25

Keywords

  • Metafor, Kişisel Satış, Lojistik Regresyon, Olgu Bilim
  • Metaphor, Personal Sales, Logistic Regression, Phenemology

How to Cite

CANDAN, S. S., & BAYRAM, S. S. (2023). Metaphors perception in personal sales concept: Evaluation with logistic regression. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 11(1), 208–225. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v11i1.2204

Copyright (c) 2023 Selva Seza CANDAN- Seliha Seçil BAYRAM

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This study aimed to determine the perceptions of the Medical Promotion and Marketing Program students regarding personal selling with the help of metaphors. The sample of the research consists of the students studying in the Medical Promotion and Marketing Program of Karabük University, Vocational School of Health Services and 191 participants who graduated from this program and started working life. The phenomenology method, a qualitative research approach, was used in the study. The concepts and facts obtained were first analyzed using descriptive content analysis. Then, using the IBM SPSS Statistics 21 package program, frequency and percentage values, logistic regression analysis and Chi-square analysis was applied to the demographic characteristics of the participants. Obtained results; The metaphors developed by the students with the help of animal, plant and colour metaphors for the perception of the concept of personal selling and the majority of their explanations showed that they were in a positive perception. According to the results of the chi-square analysis, in which the metaphor that the students perceive the concept of personal selling and the graduation status are compared, It was concluded that the only metaphor explaining the concept of personal selling according to graduation status is “plant”. In addition, logistic regression analysis established a model to determine the metaphors that explain the dependent variable of "working status in the sales field". Animal and plant metaphors explained the model significantly.

PDF (Türkçe)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Akpınar, S. ve Yıldız, Ş. (2018). Muhasebe eğitimi alan öğrencilerin muhasebe algılarına yönelik metaforlar. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, 77, 91–114.
  2. Alase, A. ( 2017). The interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA): A guide to a good qualitative research approach. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies, 5(2), 9-19.
  3. Bak, G. (2020). Kişisel satış personelinin mesleklerine ilişkin metaforik algılarının bir analizi. International Journal of Disciplines Economics & Administrative Sciences Studies, 6 (14), 5-13.
  4. Banerjee, A. (2013). The role of personal selling in home insurance in Indian market. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 2(1), 34-39.
  5. Barceló, J.A. (2018). Chi-square analysis. Spain: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
  6. Bayraktaroğlu, S., Kutanis, R. Ö. ve Tunç, T. (2011). İnsan kaynakları yönetimi bilişsel düzeyde nasıl algılanıyor? Metafora Dayalı Bir Değerlendirme. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 6(1), 7-29.
  7. Boozer, R.W., Wyld, D.C. ve Grant, J. (1990). Using metaphor to create more effective sales messages. Journal of Services Marketing, 4(3), 63-71.
  8. Bremer, K. ve Lee, M. (1997). Metafors in marketing: Review and implications for marketers. Advances In Consumer Research, 24, 419-424.
  9. Bristow D. N., Gulati R., Amyx D. ve Slack J. (2006). An empirical look at professional selling from a student perspective. Journal of Education for Business, 81(5), 242-249.
  10. Burnett, M., Pettijohn, C. ve Keith, N. (2008). A comparison of the ethical perceptions of prospective personal selling and advertising employees. Marketing Management Journal, 18(1), 77-83.
  11. Creswell, J.W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. United Kingdom: Sage publications.
  12. Çokluk, Ö. (2010). Kuram ve uygulamada eğitim bilimleri. Educational Sciences: Theory &Practice, 10(3), 1357-1407.
  13. Erdoğan, Z. (2018). Bilim olarak pazarlama. İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım.
  14. Erkılıç, C.E. ve Aksoy, A. (2020). Hastanelerde finansal başarısızlık tahmini: Lojistik regresyon modeli ile kamu hastaneleri üzerine bir uygulama. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 12 (2), 1415-1433.
  15. Etikan, I., Musa, S.A. ve Alkassim, R.S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive Sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1). 1-4.
  16. Firmansyah, F., Margono, S., Rohman, F. ve Khusniyah, N. (2018). The concept and steps of personal selling. Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, 101, 225-232.
  17. Ford, J.B., Honeycutt, E.D. ve Joseph, M. (1995). New Zealand students’ preferences for careers in sales: Implications for marketing educators. Developments in Marketing Science, 18, 312–316.
  18. Gilliam, D.A. ve Rockwell, C.C. (2018). Stories and metaphors in retail selling. International Journal of Retail &Distribution Management, 46(6), 545-559.
  19. Gök, A.A. ve Derin, N. (2014). Pazarlama bölümü öğrencilerinin meslek imajı algıları ve meslek imajını oluşturan faktörlerin belirlenmesine dair bir araştırma. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 28(2), 133-156.
  20. Gül, N. (2019). Çalışanların insan kaynakları yönetimi algılarının metaforlar aracılığıyla analizi: Özel sağlık kurumu çalışanlarıyla bir uygulama. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Yüksek Lisan Tezi, Eskişehir.
  21. Hawkes, T. (1972). Metaphor. United Kingdom: Methuen Publishing Ltd.
  22. Honeycutt, Jr.E.D. ve Ford, J.B. (1995). Guidelines for managing an international sales force. Industrial Marketing Management, 24 (2), 135–44.
  23. Hosmer, D. W. ve Lemeshow, S. (2000). Applied logistic regression. USA: Wiley-Interscience Publication.
  24. Husserl, E. (1931). Ideas: General introduction to pure phenomenology (D. Carr, Trans.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
  25. Karaboğa, E., N., C. (2022). Bilinçli tüketici kavramına ilişkin algıların değerlendirilmesi: Bir metafor analizi çalışması, bmij, 10 (1), 412-428.
  26. Karakaya, F., Quigley, C., Bingham, F., Hari, J. ve Nasir, A. (2014). Business students’ perception of sales careers: Differences between students in Switzerland, Turkey, and the United States. Journal Of Educatıon For Busıness, 89(1), 13–19.
  27. Koçyiğit, M., Aktan, E. ve Çakmak, V. (2018). İletişim fakültesi halkla ilişkiler ve tanıtım bölümü öğrencilerinin halkla ilişkiler kavramına ilişkin metaforik algılarının incelenmesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 21(2), 158-172.
  28. Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction, New York: Oxford Universty Press.
  29. Kumar A. ve Kumar P. (2013). An examination of factors influencing students selection of business majors using TRA framework. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 11(1), 77-105.
  30. Kurnaz, E. ve Batır, T. (2019). Genel muhasebe dersi hakkında üniversite öğrencilerinin metaforik algıları: Erzincan Binali Yıldırım Üniversitesi örneği. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 21(3), 829-854.
  31. Lagace, R. R. ve Longfellow T. A. (1989). The impact of classroom style on student attitudes toward sales careers: A comparative approach. Journal of Marketing Education, 11(3), 72-77.
  32. Lakoff, G. ve Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  33. Lakoff, G. ve Johnsen, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by. London: The university of Chicago press.
  34. Lakoff, G. ( 1992). The contemporary theory of metaphor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  35. Levine, P. M. (2005). Metaphors and image of classrooms. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 41(4), 172-175.
  36. Lysonski, S. ve Durvasula, S. (1998). A cross-national investigation of student attitudes toward personal selling: Implications for marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 20(2), 161–173.
  37. Miles, M.B. ve Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis, London: Sage Publications.
  38. Morgan, G. (1998). Yönetim ve örgüt teorilerinde metafor. İstanbul: BZD yayıncılık.
  39. Ömür, D. ve Çakır, Ç. (2021). Ortaokul 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin fen laboratuvarı kavramına yönelik metaforik algıları. Ihlara Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(2), 295-310.
  40. Richards, R.H. (1936). The philosophy of rhetoric, New York: Oxford University Press.
  41. Schmelz, D.R. ve Kennedy, K. (2011). A global perspective on the current state of sales education in the college curriculum. journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 31(1), 55-75.
  42. Sekizsu, B. ve Arslan, C. M. (2020). Muhasebeye metaforik bir bakış açısı. Uluslararası Muhasebe ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 167-186.
  43. Spillan, J. E., Totten, J. W. ve Ziemnowicz, C. (2007). What are students’ perceptions of personal selling as a career?. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 11, 19-30.
  44. Spillan, J. E., Totten, J. W. ve Chaubey, M. D. (2011). Exploring personal selling as a career option: A case study of the perceptions of African-American students. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 15(2), 93-106.
  45. Şen, F. (2019). Kalite algılarının metaforlarla değerlendirilmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Toplam Kalite Yönetimi Anabilim Dalı Kalite Yönetimi Programı Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İzmir.
  46. Torun, T. (2020). Lisans öğrencilerin pazarlama ve pazarlama derslerine yönelik algılarının metaforik olarak incelenmesi. Pazarlama Teorisi ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, 6(2), 187-216.
  47. Walton, E. ve Lloyd, W. (2011). An analysis of metaphors used for inclusive education in South Africa. Acta Academica, 43(3), 1-31.
  48. Ward, J. ve Gaidis, W. (1990). Metaphor in promotional communication: A review of research on metaphor comprehension and quality, Advances In Consumer Research, 17, 636-642.
  49. Weeks, W.A. ve Muehling, D.D. (1987). Students’ perceptions of personal selling. Industrial Marketing Management, 16(2), 145- I51.
  50. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  51. Yılmaz, N., Özer, E. ve Fettahoğlu, R. (2020). Sağlık yöneticisi kavramına ilişkin bir metafor analizi. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(1), 115-124.
  52. Youguo, D. (2013). Study on the essence of metaphor. China: Atlantis Press.
  53. Zhang, F. ve Hu, J. A. (2009). Study of metaphor and its application in language learning and teaching. International Education Studies, 2(2), 77-81.