|
| Feedback: Everyone is Doing It, But Are They Doing It Right? |
| Sunday, May 29, 2016 |
| 3:00 PM–3:50 PM |
| Vevey 3 & 4, Swissotel |
| Area: OBM/EAB; Domain: Translational |
| Chair: Julie M. Slowiak (University of Minnesota Duluth) |
| CE Instructor: Julie M. Slowiak, Ph.D. |
| Abstract: Experimental analyses of the characteristics of performance feedback inform the proper use and application of feedback as OBM interventions. In this symposium, we will present and discuss the results of three laboratory-based experiments that examine critical components of feedback and associated performance goals. The first presenter will discuss the differential effects of three different feedback modalities on performance of a simple data entry task. The second presenter will discuss the interaction between feedback source and goal difficulty on performance and feedback-seeking behavior. Finally, the third presenter will discuss the effects of altering the placement of a single corrective statement in a feedback sequence that includes two positive statements on individuals' persistence to perform in the presence of a challenging �stretch� goal. Come and find out the best mode and sequence with which to deliver feedback and how the type of performance goals in place might influence the appropriate mode of feedback. |
| Keyword(s): feedback sequence, feedback source, goal difficulty, technology |
| |
| Effects of Feedback Modality on Performance |
| GARRETT WARRILOW (Western Michigan University), Douglas Johnson (Western Michigan University) |
| Abstract: Giving employees information about their performance is a common method for employers seeking to improve or change performance. With the popularity of the internet and computers feedback today is often provided through emails, text messages and video meetings. While feedback has continued to evolve within and across organizations little has been done to assess the impact its delivery through various modalities has. This study looks to explore and evaluate the relationship between the modality which objective feedback is delivered, and the differential effects it produces on performance of a check entering task. This is an area in which there seems to be a large gap in the literature especially considering the impact it may have on any feedback study. This experiment will be a laboratory study employing a between-group repeated measures design with random assignment to one of the following four experimental conditions; 1) no feedback, 2) computer delivered feedback, 3) feedback via cell phone text message and, 4) feedback via face-to-face interaction. |
| |
| Impact of Feedback Source and Goal Difficulty on Work Performance and Feedback Seeking |
| BRANDON BREUER (University of Minnesota Duluth), Julie M. Slowiak (University of Minnesota Duluth) |
| Abstract: This research examined the influence of computer monitoring on work performance and feedback-seeking behavior under different conditions of feedback source and performance goals. As the third in a series of three experiments, this study was conducted in a laboratory setting using a data-entry work task designed to simulate the job of a medical transcriptionist. Undergraduate students attended five 45-minute sessions, and measures of ability and keyboarding skill were collected to use in the analyses. This study used a 2 x 3 factorial design to examine effects of computer monitoring under different conditions of feedback source (computer-mediated / researcher-mediated) and goal difficulty easy / moderate / difficult) on both task performance and feedback-seeking behavior. Results indicate that performance was highest, overall, when the participants received difficult goals in combination with computer-mediated feedback; performance was lowest when participants received easy goals in combination with computer-mediated feedback. The type of feedback did not appear to influence performance when individuals received moderate goals. Feedback-seeking behavior was higher among participants who received difficult goals. Discussion of these results, as well as an overview of participants’ levels of stress and satisfaction with feedback medium, will be presented. |
| |
| The Influence of Feedback Sequence and a Challenging Goal on Task Performance |
| AREANNA LAKOWSKE (University of Minnesota Duluth), Julie M. Slowiak (University of Minnesota Duluth) |
| Abstract: Due to the widespread use, acceptance for, and effectiveness of using feedback and goal setting simultaneously, the present study focused on the use of feedback to improve persistence to perform in the presence of a challenging “stretch” goal. This study also examined the influence that core self-evaluation, job satisfaction, goal commitment, and stress may have on the persistence toward reaching a challenging “stretch” goal when individuals were provided with various feedback sequence statements. The most well-known feedback sequence is the “Sandwich”, which places a corrective statement between two positive statements. A within-subjects design was used to expose participants to a control (no feedback) condition and three feedback sequences: (1) PCP (positive, corrective, positive); (2) CPP (corrective, positive, positive); and (3) PPC (positive, positive, corrective). Results of this study will illustrate the most effective feedback sequence to increase performance, as well as individual preference for a particular feedback sequence. The influence of core self-evaluation, job satisfaction, goal commitment, and stress will be discussed and practical implications will be provided. |
|
| |