Providing Performance Feedback: Reactions to Alternate Methods

MaryBeth DeGregorio, , Cynthia D Fisher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Subordinate reactions to feedback given in four different ways were assessed. Method one was unilateral, top-down feedback. Method two was supervisory feedback with subordinate participation in the discussion. Methods three and four involved a self-appraisal instrument completed prior to a participative performance discussion. In method three, the self-appraisal was not explicitly discussed, whereas in method four it was the heart of the discussion. All participative methods tended to result in more positive subordinate perceptions than the unilateral method, but no one particular participative technique was consistently superior. The appraisal methods had no differential impact on post-feedback performance.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)605-616
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Management
Volume14
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 1988

Fingerprint

Performance feedback
Top-down
Participation

Cite this

@article{1c2337aedc4d40b3b20981b245c664f3,
title = "Providing Performance Feedback: Reactions to Alternate Methods",
abstract = "Subordinate reactions to feedback given in four different ways were assessed. Method one was unilateral, top-down feedback. Method two was supervisory feedback with subordinate participation in the discussion. Methods three and four involved a self-appraisal instrument completed prior to a participative performance discussion. In method three, the self-appraisal was not explicitly discussed, whereas in method four it was the heart of the discussion. All participative methods tended to result in more positive subordinate perceptions than the unilateral method, but no one particular participative technique was consistently superior. The appraisal methods had no differential impact on post-feedback performance.",
author = "MaryBeth DeGregorio, and Fisher, {Cynthia D}",
year = "1988",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/014920638801400410",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "605--616",
journal = "Journal of Management",
issn = "0149-2063",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "4",

}

Providing Performance Feedback : Reactions to Alternate Methods. / DeGregorio, , MaryBeth; Fisher, Cynthia D.

In: Journal of Management, Vol. 14, No. 4, 01.12.1988, p. 605-616.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Providing Performance Feedback

T2 - Reactions to Alternate Methods

AU - DeGregorio, , MaryBeth

AU - Fisher, Cynthia D

PY - 1988/12/1

Y1 - 1988/12/1

N2 - Subordinate reactions to feedback given in four different ways were assessed. Method one was unilateral, top-down feedback. Method two was supervisory feedback with subordinate participation in the discussion. Methods three and four involved a self-appraisal instrument completed prior to a participative performance discussion. In method three, the self-appraisal was not explicitly discussed, whereas in method four it was the heart of the discussion. All participative methods tended to result in more positive subordinate perceptions than the unilateral method, but no one particular participative technique was consistently superior. The appraisal methods had no differential impact on post-feedback performance.

AB - Subordinate reactions to feedback given in four different ways were assessed. Method one was unilateral, top-down feedback. Method two was supervisory feedback with subordinate participation in the discussion. Methods three and four involved a self-appraisal instrument completed prior to a participative performance discussion. In method three, the self-appraisal was not explicitly discussed, whereas in method four it was the heart of the discussion. All participative methods tended to result in more positive subordinate perceptions than the unilateral method, but no one particular participative technique was consistently superior. The appraisal methods had no differential impact on post-feedback performance.

U2 - 10.1177/014920638801400410

DO - 10.1177/014920638801400410

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 605

EP - 616

JO - Journal of Management

JF - Journal of Management

SN - 0149-2063

IS - 4

ER -