The Effects of Monitoring Individual and Group Performance on the Distribution of Effort Across Tasks1

This study was concerned with the mechanism(s) via which performance monitoring affects task performance. To investigate whether an individual's concerns over the evaluation of his or her performance underlie the effects of performance monitoring (independent of contingent consequences) on the distribution of effort across tasks, the study examined whether the way in which individuals performed two tasks was differentially affected by the way in which supervisors monitored performance on those tasks. Subjects working in a group setting performed two different tasks for 90 minutes, their instructions being to perform as well as possible on each task. When supervisors periodically monitored the work output of each individual within the group on one of the two tasks, subjects perceived that the supervisor was evaluating and comparing individual performance, and produced more on the monitored task at the expense of the unmonitored task. When, however, the supervisor's monitoring focused on group rather than individual products, subjects perceived that the supervisor was less likely to be able to evaluate and to compare individual performance, and their performance on the two tasks was the same, regardless of which task was monitored. Path analysis supported the interpretation that the effects of monitoring on performance were mediated by evaluation concerns associated with performance on each task.

[1]  N. Brewer,et al.  Supervisory behaviour and team performance amongst police patrol sergeants , 1994 .

[2]  Kipling D. Williams,et al.  PROCESSES Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration , 2022 .

[3]  J. R. Aiello,et al.  Computer Monitoring of Work Performance: Extending the Social Facilitation Framework to Electronic Presence1 , 1993 .

[4]  Michael E. Enzle,et al.  Surveillant intentions and intrinsic motivation. , 1993 .

[5]  J. R. Larson,et al.  Performance monitoring: How it affects work productivity. , 1990 .

[6]  Maryalice Citera,et al.  Beyond effective supervision: Identifying key interactions between superior and subordinate , 1990 .

[7]  J. Komaki,et al.  Definitely not a breeze: Extending an operant model of effective supervision to teams. , 1989 .

[8]  S. Harkins,et al.  Social loafing and group evaluation. , 1989 .

[9]  S. Harkins Social loafing and self-evaluation with an objective standard*1 , 1988 .

[10]  S. Harkins,et al.  Evaluation and Performance , 1988, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[11]  S. Harkins,et al.  Social loafing and self-evaluation with a social standard. , 1987 .

[12]  J. Komaki Toward effective supervision: An operant analysis and comparison of managers at work. , 1986 .

[13]  J. Komaki,et al.  Development of an operant-based taxonomy and observational index of supervisory behavior. , 1986 .

[14]  S. Harkins,et al.  The Role of Evaluation in Eliminating Social Loafing , 1985 .

[15]  Carol Sansone,et al.  Rewarding pinball wizardry: Effects of evaluation and cue value on intrinsic interest , 1984 .

[16]  Fred Luthans,et al.  7 – Toward an Observation System for Measuring Leader Behavior in Natural Settings* , 1984 .

[17]  C. F. Bond,et al.  Social facilitation: a meta-analysis of 241 studies. , 1983, Psychological bulletin.

[18]  R. Ryan,et al.  Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. , 1982 .

[19]  R. Baumeister A SELF-PRESENTATIONAL VIEW OF SOCIAL PHENOMENA , 1982 .

[20]  N. A. Kramer,et al.  Informational versus Controlling Verbal Rewards , 1980 .

[21]  J. Pfeffer,et al.  A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. , 1978, Administrative science quarterly.

[22]  R. Geen,et al.  Drive Theory of Social Facilitation: Twelve Years of Theory and Research , 1977 .

[23]  J. Pfeffer,et al.  An examination of need-satisfaction models of job attitudes. , 1977 .

[24]  Mark R. Lepper,et al.  Turning play into work: Effects of adult surveillance and extrinsic rewards on children's intrinsic motivation. , 1975 .

[25]  E. A. Fleishman,et al.  The description of supervisory behavior. , 1953 .