Performance information systems minimally consist of a performance standard, performance measurement, incentives to match performance to the standard, and periodic reports on performance. In this study four performance information systems are imposed on laboratory groups solving simple routine problems. These included speed, minimum messages, minimum error, and voting. There was a control condition with no explicit, performance information system. In aggregate, the groups tried to meet the assigned standard of performance. The performance information systems also set into motion other group processes resulting in numerous sensible but unanticipated consequences. It was not possible to conclude that the explicit performance information systems improved overall performance. The choice of performance information system did affect the task processes, the choice of structure, and the involvement in task supporting processes. The variability of behavior within each group suggests caution in widespread application of performance information systems.
[1]
L. R. Hoffman.
Group Problem Solving1
,
1965
.
[2]
S. Dornbusch,et al.
Evaluation and the exercise of authority
,
1976
.
[3]
V. Ridgway.
Dysfunctional Consequences of Performance Measurements
,
1956
.
[4]
S. Kerr.
On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B.
,
1975
.
[5]
Chris Argyris,et al.
The incompleteness of social-psychological theory: Examples from small group, cognitive consistency, and attribution research.
,
1969
.
[6]
J. Garbarino.
The Impact of Anticipated Reward upon Cross-Age Tutoring
,
1975
.