The Effects of Information Technology and the Perceived Mood of the Feedback Giver on Feedback Seeking

A major tenet in organizational behavior literature is that feedback improves performance. If feedback is thought to improve performance, then individuals should actively seek feedback in their work. Yet, surprisingly, individuals seldom seek feedback perhaps because of face-loss costs of obtaining feedback face-to-face. Furthermore, in cases where the giver is perceived to be in a bad mood, individuals may be even more reluctant to seek feedback if they believe seeking feedback risks the giver's wrath and a negative evaluation. In this paper, we explain how information technology can be designed to mediate feedback communication and deliver feedback that promotes feedback seeking. In a laboratory experiment, the effects of information technology and the perceived mood of the feedback giver on the behavior of feedback seekers are examined. The results showed that individuals in both the computer-mediated feedback environment and the computer-generated feedback environment sought feedback more frequently than individuals in the face-to-face feedback environment. In addition, individuals sought feedback more frequently from a giver who was perceived to be in a good mood than from a giver who was perceived to be in a bad mood.

[1]  A. Isen,et al.  Affect, accessibility of material in memory, and behavior: a cognitive loop? , 1978, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[2]  D. Nebeker,et al.  The Effects of Computer Monitoring, Standards, and Rewards on Work Performance, Job Satisfaction, and Stress1 , 1993 .

[3]  Dov Eden,et al.  Pygmalion, Goal Setting, and Expectancy: Compatible Ways to Boost Productivity , 1988 .

[4]  B. Depaulo,et al.  Nonverbal behavior and self-presentation. , 1992, Psychological bulletin.

[5]  P. Christopher Earley,et al.  Technology, credibility, and feedback use , 1989 .

[6]  L. L. Cummings,et al.  FEEDBACK AS AN INDIVIDUAL RESOURCE: PERSONAL STRATEGIES OF CREATING INFORMATION , 1983 .

[7]  R. A. Grant,et al.  Building and testing a causal model of an information technology's impact , 1989, ICIS '89.

[8]  P. Earley,et al.  Computer-generated performance feedback in the magazine-subscription industry , 1988 .

[9]  Ederyn Williams,et al.  Medium or Message: Communications Medium as a Determinant of Interpersonal Evaluation* , 1975 .

[10]  Bobby J. Calder,et al.  Perceptual organization in task performance , 1987 .

[11]  J. R. Larson.  The performance feedback process: A preliminary model , 1984 .

[12]  Carol T. Kulik,et al.  The Impact of Computerized Performance Monitoring and Prior Performance Knowledge on Performance Evaluation1 , 1993 .

[13]  S. Ashford.  Feedback-Seeking in Individual Adaptation: A Resource Perspective , 1986 .

[14]  Gregory B. Northcraft,et al.  Conveying more (or less) than we realize: The role of impression-management in feedback-seeking , 1992 .

[15]  Elizabeth Wolfe Morrison,et al.  Impression Management in the Feedback-Seeking Process: A Literaturereview and Research Agenda , 1991 .

[16]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  A Path Analytic Study of Individual Characteristics, Computer Anxiety and Attitudes toward Microcomputers , 1989 .

[17]  Philip Bobko,et al.  A solution to some dilemmas when testing hypotheses about ordinal interactions. , 1986 .

[18]  Christopher A. Higgins,et al.  Computerized performance monitoring systems: use and abuse , 1986, CACM.

[19]  Gregory B. Northcraft,et al.  The preservation of self in everyday life: The effects of performance expectations and feedback context on feedback inquiry , 1990 .

[20]  G. Bower.  Mood and memory. , 1981, The American psychologist.

[21]  E. Goffman.  The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , 1959 .

[22]  C. Argyris.  Management Information Systems: The Challenge to Rationality and Emotionality , 1971 .

[23]  Lee Sproull,et al.  Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication , 1986 .

[24]  G. Bohrnstedt,et al.  Statistics for social data analysis , 1982 .

[25]  P. Ekman,et al.  Relative importance of face, body, and speech in judgments of personality and affect. , 1980 .

[26]  P. Christopher Earley,et al.  IMPACT OF PROCESS AND OUTCOME FEEDBACK ON THE RELATION OF GOAL SETTING TO TASK PERFORMANCE , 1990 .

[27]  Carol T. Kulik,et al.  The Effect of Information Format and Performance Pattern on Performance Appraisal Judgments in a Computerized Performance Monitoring Context1 , 1994 .

[28]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication System Network Data: Theoretical Concerns and Empirical Examples , 1990, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[29]  T. J. Schoeneman,et al.  Reports of the sources of self-knowledge1 , 1981 .

[30]  Henry L. Tosi.  A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance , 1991 .

[31]  J. Brehm.  A theory of psychological reactance. , 1981 .

[32]  J. Valacich,et al.  Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups , 1990 .

[33]  Christopher A. Higgins,et al.  The Impact of Computerized Performance Monitoring on Service Work: Testing a Causal Model , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[34]  E. E. Jones,et al.  The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. , 1972 .

[35]  E. A. Locke,et al.  Goal setting and task performance: 1969–1980. , 1981 .

[36]  Sara Kiesler,et al.  Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication , 1984 .

[37]  Alphonse Chapanis,et al.  Knowledge of performance as an incentive in repetitive, monotonous tasks. , 1964 .

[38]  William G. Cochran,et al.  Experimental Designs, 2nd Edition , 1950 .

[39]  Terri L. Griffith.  Monitoring and Performance: A Comparison of Computer and Supervisor Monitoring , 1993 .