The impact of peer evaluation on team effort, productivity, motivation and performance in global virtual teams

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to assess the effect of peer evaluations on team-level effort, productivity, motivation and overall team performance. Design/methodology/approach This study explores the impact of a peer evaluation system on 895 multicultural and transnational global virtual teams (GVTs) composed of 5,852 university students from 130 different countries. The study uses a quasi-experiment in which the group project is implemented under two conditions over two sequential iterations. In the first condition, team members do not receive peer evaluation feedback during the project. In the second condition, participants completed detailed peer evaluations of their team members and received feedback weekly for eight consecutive weeks. Findings Results suggest that when peer evaluations are used in GVTs during the project, teams show: higher levels of group effort; lower levels of average productivity and motivation; and no clear evidence of improved team performance. Results cast doubts on the benefits of peer evaluation within GVTs as the practice fails to reach its main objective of improving team performance and generates some negative internal dynamics. Practical implications The major implication of the study for managers and educators using GVTs is that the use of peer evaluations during the course of a project does not appear to improve objective team performance and reduces team motivation and perception of productivity despite increases in teams’ perceptions of effort and performance. Originality/value This study contributes to the scanty literature regarding the impact of peer evaluation systems on group-level dynamics and performance outcomes.

Unpacking the Role of Feedback in Virtual Team Effectiveness

“…Very few studies (mixed effects: k = 3, +/−; partially negative effects: k = 2, −) found negative effects of team feedback on the dependent variables (e.g., productivity/participation, Hiltz et al, 1991; Tavoletti et al, 2019; or team performance, Hiltz et al, 1991). However, some of these studies also suggest that the negative effects of feedback depend on how it was delivered.…”

“…However, we also identified four studies that reported partially negative effects for subjective feedback on team mediators and team performance outcomes. Among these studies, Tavoletti et al (2019) used a quasi-experimental design and evaluated the effect of peer evaluations in an impressive sample of 895 transnational global virtual teams throughout an entire 10-week project and showed that under the subjective feedback condition, virtual teams showed lower levels of average productivity and motivation, and no clear evidence of improved team performance. The authors discuss how subjective feedback (in particular when it originates from peers) can produce counter-productive team dynamics because “group members have an incentive to intentionally distort their evaluations of peers downward as a way of enhancing their own relative performance rating” (Tavoletti et al, 2019, p. 336)…”

“…In four studies, feedback for virtual teams was exclusively provided at the individual level. In terms of feedback operationalization, individual-level feedback typically consisted of reports reflecting peer evaluations (e.g., McLarnon et al, 2019; Tavoletti et al, 2019). Three studies drew on peer assessments in field settings (i.e., field quasi-experiments) and one study was a laboratory study using a confederate to give feedback about individual contributions (Marler & Marett, 2013).…”

“…With regards to the cultural context, the majority ( k = 19) of the reviewed studies were conducted in European countries. Only five studies drew on cross-cultural samples, such as in the context of the X-Culture international consulting competition (McLarnon et al, 2019; Tavoletti et al, 2019).…”

A Focus on Ethical Value under the Vision of Leadership, Teamwork, Effective Communication and Productivity

“…Thus, the concern arises when through knowledgeable colleagues the level of effort, productivity, motivation and performance of teams are evaluated. Then, results frequently show more significant effort, lower levels of productivity and motivation and no evidence of having exceeded the performance, which does not show the expected benefits (Tavoletti et al 2019).…”