Examining the relationship between feedback and performance in a monitored environment: A clarification and extension of feedback intervention theory

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2006.11.004Get rights and content

Abstract

Although research recognizes the importance of performance feedback to individual performance, the effects of feedback are complex and not fully understood. In this study, I extend research on the multidimensional nature of feedback by examining the effect of three feedback attributes (control, source, and constructiveness) on individuals' task performance. As predicted, giving participants control over feedback enhanced their desire to improve. Additionally, constructiveness and feedback source interacted to affect interpersonal fairness. Interpersonal fairness, in turn, directly influenced participants' level of attention which moderated the relationship between their desire to improve and their actual task performance.

Section snippets

Performance feedback

Most early feedback research focused on the mere presence or absence of feedback and ignored its complexities. This focus precluded full understanding of the feedback process (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996). However, subsequent feedback research recognized that feedback is complex and multifaceted (Cusella, 1987, Ilgen et al., 1979). Research on the multidimensional nature of feedback argues the effects of feedback on performance are variable. Feedback may improve performance under some conditions.

Computer performance monitoring

Organizations have a natural interest in monitoring their employees' performance for a variety of reasons. Performance monitoring enables organizations to ensure they get what they are paying employees for. Information obtained from monitoring may also be used to provide employees with feedback and to help improve their performance. Research indicates that monitoring may enhance employee effort (Brewer, 1995), play a role in effective supervision (Komaki, 1986), and increase employee

Control

Feedback research indicates that the frequency of feedback impacts recipients' behavioral and attitudinal reactions to feedback (Ilgen et al., 1979). However, providing employees optimal amounts of feedback is a daunting challenge because individuals vary considerably in the amount and frequency of feedback they desire and find optimal (Fedor, 1991). Giving individuals control over the amount of feedback they receive may help overcome this challenge and lead to positive attitudes and behaviors.

The effect of feedback on task performance

In this section I examine the effect of interpersonal fairness and control on performance. Research indicates that perceptions of interpersonal fairness are related to a variety of organizationally relevant outcomes including satisfaction and performance (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001). I similarly expect the perceived interpersonal fairness of feedback to influence individual's level of attention.

Kluger and Denisi's (1996) feedback intervention theory (FIT) indicates that feedback recipients

Participants and design

A total of 165 undergraduates (97 men and 68 women) participated in the study. Participants received partial course credit for their participation. The study employed a 2 × 2 × 2 between-subjects design in which the following variables were manipulated: (1) Feedback Source (Computer versus Supervisor), (2) Constructiveness (Constructive versus Destructive), and (3) Control over feedback (Control versus No control).

Procedure

On reporting to the session, participants were told that the purpose of the study was

Results

I conducted manipulation checks for feedback control and source. To assess the effectiveness of the control manipulation, a t-test was conducted on participants' perceived degree of control over feedback. As expected, participants in the Control condition reported feeling a much stronger sense of control over the feedback they received than did participants in the No Control conditions, t(164) = 10.28, p < .01, (means = 3.89 and 1.78). I tested the effectiveness of the feedback source manipulation by

Discussion

Although CPM receives considerable attention in the popular press, there is relatively little research on the relationship between monitoring and performance. In contrast, research has examined performance feedback for decades. Nevertheless, the relationship between feedback and performance is complex and questions remain. In this study, I integrated and extended research on CPM and feedback to consider the effect of three feedback attributes (control, constructiveness, and source) on monitored

References (70)

  • Aiello, J. R., Shao, Y. (1992). Effects of computer monitoring on task performance. Paper presented as part of...
  • J.R. Aiello et al.

    Computer monitoring of work performance: Extending the social facilitation framework to electronic presence

    Journal of Applied Social Psychology

    (1993)
  • G.S. Alder et al.

    Electronic performance monitoring: An organizational justice and concertive control perspective

    Management Communication Quarterly

    (1997)
  • B.J. Alge

    The effects of computer surveillance on perceptions of privacy and procedural fairness

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2001)
  • M.L. Ambrose et al.

    Designing, implementing, and utilizing computerized performance monitoring: Enhancing organizational justice

    Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management

    (2000)
  • Workplace testing and monitoring

    (2000)
  • Workplace monitoring and surveillance survey

    (2001)
  • N.F. Angel

    November. Evaluating employees by computer

    Personnel Administrator

    (1989)
  • J. Annett

    Feedback and human behavior: The effects of knowledge of results, incentives, and reinforcement on training and performance

    (1969)
  • J.R. Averill

    Personal control over aversive stimuli and its relationship to stress

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1973)
  • R.A. Baron

    Negative effects of destructive criticism: Impact on conflict, self-efficacy, and task performance

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (1988)
  • R.A. Baron

    Criticism (informal negative feedback) as a source of perceived unfairness in organizations: Effects, mechanisms, and countermeasures

  • R.M. Baron et al.

    The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1986)
  • N. Brewer

    The effects of monitoring individual and group performance on the distribution of effort across tasks

    Journal of Applied Social Psychology

    (1995)
  • G. Bylinsky

    How companies spy on employees

    Fortune

    (1991, 4 November)
  • R.J. Burke et al.

    Characteristics of effective employee performance review and development interviews: Replication and extension

    Personnel Psychology

    (1978)
  • P. Carayon

    Effects of electronic performance monitoring on job design and worker stress Review of the literature and conceptual model

    Human Factors

    (1993)
  • J. Chalykoff et al.

    Computer-aided monitoring: Its influence on employee job satisfaction and turnover

    Personnel Psychology

    (1989)
  • S. Chhokar et al.

    A field study of the effect of feedback frequency on performance

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (1984)
  • Y. Cohen-Charash et al.

    The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis

    Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

    (2001)
  • J.A. Colquitt

    On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2001)
  • J.A. Colquitt et al.

    Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2001)
  • L.P. Cusella

    The effects of source expertise and feedback valence on intrinsic motivation

    Human Communication Research

    (1982)
  • L.P. Cusella

    Feedback motivation and performance

  • G.P. Daft et al.

    Information richness: A new approach to managerial information processing and organizational design

  • Cited by (34)

    • When humans and computers induce social stress through negative feedback: Effects on performance and subjective state

      2022, Computers in Human Behavior
      Citation Excerpt :

      In the literature, interpersonal fairness has been linked to task performance, organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior (Colquitt et al., 2013), which could all be impaired by automated feedback that is not perceived as fair. While the idea of interpersonal interactions between a human and a system could be counterintuitive, this was already proposed by Alder (2007). Though he found no differences in interpersonal fairness between human and computer feedback, our result could be a sign that, since his study, perceptions and attributions in society regarding automation have changed.

    • Feedback revisited: Adding perspectives based on positive psychology. Implications for theory and classroom practice

      2014, Teaching and Teacher Education
      Citation Excerpt :

      Examples of such review studies include the works by Kluger and DeNisi (1996), Black and Wiliam (1998), Hattie and Timperley (2007), and Shute (2008). The aim of feedback is generally described as being to close the gap between current performance and a goal and effective (learning-enhancing) feedback is described as specific and goal-related (Alder, 2007; Black & Wiliam, 1998; Duijnhouwer, 2010; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Kluger & DeNisi, 1996; Sadler, 1989; Shute, 2008). In this article, we will follow Duijnhouwer's definition of feedback (2010): “information provided by an external agent regarding some aspect(s) of the learner's task performance, intended to modify the learner's cognition, motivation and/or behavior for the purpose of improving performance” (p. 16).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text