Positive and negative supervisor developmental feedback and task-performance

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize, understand, and measure positive and negative aspects of supervisor developmental feedback (SDF) and investigate their relationships with task performance. Design/methodology/approach – In Study 1, common themes in SDF were identified and a set of SDF items were developed to capture the positive and negative SDF domain. Study 2 entailed the administration of the items to respondents to examine the dimensionality of the items through exploratory factor analysis. In Study 3, using confirmatory factor analysis we further examined the extent to which positive and negative developmental feedback (PSDF and NSDF) were conceptually distinct from each other and different from an existing general measure of supervisor feedback. Findings – Study 1 and Study 2 yielded evidence that positive and negative SDF are distinct yet related constructs. Positive SDF predicted employee task performance. The positive SDF by negative SDF interaction predicted task performance. Research limitations/implications – The authors provide criterion-related validity evidence by examining the predictive validity of positive and negative SDF on subordinate task performance (reported by supervisors). Future research should examine the role of positive and negative SDF in predicting job performance in other samples and cultural contexts and for other outcomes, including organizational citizenship. Originality/value – This research refines the SDF domain by identifying positive and negative domains of the SDF construct. The authors propose and test the joint influence of positive and negative SDF. The novel findings point to the importance of supervisors providing both positive and negative feedback to enhance performance.

Is coworker feedback more important than supervisor feedback for increasing innovative behavior?

“…HR managers and line managers should be aware of the need to assist employees in obtaining ongoing feedback from different sources within the organization because our research has shown that, in the absence of one source of feedback, other sources are critical in enhancing employees’ innovative behavior. Therefore, organizations should not only encourage supervisors to provide feedback as part of the annual formal performance appraisal process (Brown, Kulik, & Lim, ; Zheng, Diaz, Jing, & Chiaburu, ) but also consider implementing an appraisal feedback process for employees through which they can obtain more regular feedback from multiple sources, not only from their direct supervisor but also from other employees in the organization (Biron, Farndale, & Paauwe, ; Kuvaas et al, ). As we have shown, feedback can promote employees’ work engagement and perceptions that the organization is upholding its side of the psychological contract and subsequently foster employees’ innovative behavior (Gruman & Saks, ; Harris, ).…”

Performance Feedback, Goal Clarity, and Public Employees’ Performance in Public Organizations

“…Many studies have convincingly demonstrated the positive connection between feedback and performance under various circumstances [2,10,12,13,15]. Favero et al (2016) examined how internal management efforts including performance feedback provision affect school performance.…”

“…Scholars [6,8] have suggested that performance feedback may alleviate the negative effects of low goal clarity on performance in public organizations by guiding employees to focus on selected goals that both positive and negative performance feedback effectively helps to enhance performance only if supervisors focus on providing performance information and deliver it consistently [9,15,20].…”

“…Accurate feedback from a supervisor can yield a number of positive results for subordinates, for example, a better understanding of organizational goals and expected roles and levels of performance and information about job tasks that can facilitate performance [9]. Performance information received from supervisors could be used as a developmental tool that aids employees in modifying their efforts and behaviors to remedy performance deficits or to reinforce desirable behaviors and attitudes producing higher performance [15,19]. Feedback could also generate an instrumental motive that encourages employees to seek for the perceived feedback as well as to self-regulate based on the feedback [14].…”

The InfluenceofFeedback Environment towardsTeacher’s Career Adaptability among Primary School Teachers in Kuching

“…Source expertise includes an understanding of the job requirements of the feedback recipient, an understanding of the recipient's actual work requirements, and the ability to accurately determine the performance of the job . Therefore, the supervisor should hold great knowledge of the performance area and know performance criteria so that the source of the information presented is credible and useful (Zheng, Diaz, Jing, & Chiaburu, 2015). The second dimension of the feedback environment is the feedback quality.…”