Who Are You to Tell Me That?! The Moderating Effect of Performance Feedback Source and Psychological Entitlement on Individual Performance

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 33-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Kip Holderness ◽  
Kari Joseph Olsen ◽  
Todd A. Thornock
Keyword(s):  
Performance Feedback ◽  
Performance Monitoring ◽  
Organizational Structures ◽  
Individual Performance ◽  
Monitoring Tool ◽  
Subsequent Performance ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Psychological Entitlement ◽  
Source Level ◽  
Feedback Source

ABSTRACT As organizational structures have become more flat, firms are increasing the use of peer reviews as a performance monitoring tool. Research suggests that the effectiveness of performance feedback, particularly negative feedback, depends on the feedback source and the recipient's sense of psychological entitlement. We conduct an experiment wherein we manipulate the valence and source level of performance feedback and examine how psychological entitlement moderates the effect of feedback on subsequent performance. We find that when providing negative performance feedback, the effect of feedback source on performance is moderated by the level of psychological entitlement of the feedback recipient. Specifically, relative to peer feedback, the effectiveness of feedback from a superior increases with the feedback recipient's entitlement. We also find that psychological entitlement and source level do not affect responses to positive feedback. Our results suggest that companies should encourage supervisors to deliver negative performance feedback, particularly to psychologically entitled employees.

Will Someone Be Checking My Work? The Effect of Psychological Entitlement and the Expectation of Being Monitored on Task Performance and Misreporting

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Kip Holderness ◽  
Kari Joseph Olsen ◽  
Todd A. Thornock ◽  
Edward C. Tomlinson
Keyword(s):  
Task Performance ◽  
Performance Monitoring ◽  
Negative Behaviors ◽  
Lower Performance ◽  
Psychological Entitlement ◽  
Workplace Behaviors ◽  
Workplace Outcomes

Psychological entitlement is a sense that one deserves more than others, and is correlated with a host of negative workplace behaviors. Because entitled individuals have a strong desire for the approval of others, we examine whether increasing the expectation of being monitored can limit some of these negative behaviors. We find that when the expectation of being monitored is low, psychological entitlement is associated with lower performance and higher misreporting. In contrast, when the expectation of being monitored is high, not only are these behaviors reduced, but performance increases and misreporting decreases for entitled individuals. Our results suggest that expectations of performance monitoring can be used to improve workplace outcomes for entitled employees.

Conducting Midterm Performance Reviews: An Exercise for Teaching Performance Management

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-19
Author(s):  
Rebecca A. Bull Schaefer
Keyword(s):  
Performance Management ◽  
Performance Appraisal ◽  
Performance Feedback ◽  
Individual Performance ◽  
Performance Management Systems ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Performance Review ◽  
Performance Reviews ◽  
Multiple Measure ◽  
Full Class

Although the annual performance review has received much criticism from practitioners and researchers alike, organizations continue to use coaching and/or reviews to maximize employee effectiveness and minimize liabilities. A semester class is a great context to practice skills relating to tracking and reviewing performance. This article describes how management instructors can implement performance reviews as an experiential exercise designed to improve students’ confidence related to receiving performance feedback. During a “Performance Appraisal Week,” instructors conduct individual performance reviews designed to discuss individual students’ class performance and elicit student–teacher feedback. Students experience the emotions of a professional face-to-face review, practice multiple-source and multiple-measure feedback interpretation, engage in performance-related dialogue, and consider plans to meet goals. During a full-class reflection and debrief, students apply concepts and discuss elements of performance management systems, and they build their confidence in how to navigate performance-related feedback discussions.

Redundant Automation Monitoring: Four Eyes Don’t See More Than Two, if Everyone Turns a Blind Eye

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (7) ◽  
pp. 902-921 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dietlind Helene Cymek
Keyword(s):  
Team Performance ◽  
Performance Feedback ◽  
Failure Detection ◽  
Individual Performance ◽  
Social Loafing ◽  
Expected Gain ◽  
Individual Feedback ◽  
Monitoring Behavior ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Working Alone

Background: In safety-critical and highly automated environments, more than one person typically monitors the system in order to increase reliability. Objective: We investigate whether the anticipated advantage of redundant automation monitoring is lost due to social loafing and whether individual performance feedback can mitigate this effect. Method: In two experiments, participants worked on a multitasking paradigm in which one task was the monitoring and cross-checking of an automation. Participants worked either alone or with a team partner on this task. The redundant group was further subdivided. One subgroup was instructed that only team performance would be evaluated, whereas the other subgroup expected to receive individual performance feedback after the experiment. Results: Compared to participants working alone, those who worked collectively but did not expect individual feedback performed significantly less cross-checks and found 25% fewer automation failures. Due to this social loafing effect, even the combined team performance did not surpass the performance of participants working alone. However, when participants expected individual performance feedback, their monitoring behavior and failure detection performance was similar to participants working alone and a team advantage became apparent. Conclusion: Social loafing in redundant automation monitoring can negate the expected gain, if individual performance feedback is not provided. Application: These findings may motivate safety experts to evaluate whether their implementation of human redundancy is vulnerable to social loafing effects.

EPM 20/20: A Review, Framework, and Research Agenda for Electronic Performance Monitoring

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel M. Ravid ◽  
David L. Tomczak ◽  
Jerod C. White ◽  
Tara S. Behrend
Keyword(s):  
Job Performance ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Performance Monitoring ◽  
Individual Performance ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Psychological Variables ◽  
Electronic Performance Monitoring ◽  
Considerable Research ◽  
Electronic Performance ◽  
Technological Means

Electronic performance monitoring (EPM) refers to the use of technological means to observe, record, and analyze information that directly or indirectly relates to job performance. The last comprehensive review of the EPM literature was published in 2000. Since 2000, dramatic advances in information technologies have created an environment in which organizations are able to monitor employees to a greater extent and with greater intensity than was previously possible. Moreover, since that time, considerable research has been devoted to understanding the effects of EPM on individual performance and attitudes. Contradictory findings in the EPM literature exist, suggesting that EPM is a multidimensional phenomenon and one for which contextual and psychological variables are pertinent. Thus, we propose a theory-based typology of EPM characteristics and use this typology as a framework to review the EPM literature and identify an agenda for future research and practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document