See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321310320
The Role of Feedback in Employee Performance Improvement
Thesis · January 2017
CITATIONS
READS
2
22,632
1 author:
Naresh Sen
Walden University
1 PUBLICATION 2 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
The Role of Feedback in Employee Performance Improvement View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Naresh Sen on 27 November 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
The Role of Feedback in Employee
Performance Improvement
By
NAR BAHADUR SEN - H00041628
A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
The University of Liverpool
in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
(HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT)
Dissertation Adviser: Dr. Ken Simpson
2017
i
DECLARATION
A Dissertation
entitled
The Role of Feedback in Employee
Performance Improvement
By
NAR BAHADUR SEN
We hereby certify that this Dissertation submitted by Nar Bahadur Sen
conforms to acceptable standards, and as such is fully adequate in
scope and quality. It is therefore approved as the fulfilment of the
Dissertation requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Human
Resource Management).
Approved:
Ken Simpson (Dissertation Adviser)
4 July 2017
The University of Liverpool
2017
ii
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
I hereby certify that this paper constitutes my own product, that where the language
of others is set forth, quotation marks so indicate, and that appropriate credit is given
where I have used the language, ideas, expressions or writings of another.
Signed
Nar Bahadur Sen
Date: 6 July 2017
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Ken Simpson for his immense support and
guidance. It would not be possible for me to be at this stage without Ms. Carol
Maloney, I am very grateful.
I would like to thank Mr. Amit Tayal, Mr. Tarek El Goweny and all NCC Group Staff. I
am very grateful towards my mother and my wife who supported me to the end of
this journey.
iv
ABSTRACT
Feedback is widely used across the organization as a tool of advice, as a tool for
behavior, skill or performance improvement. Some organizations capture the
feedback and monitor its effectiveness, while others don't, and employees (either
senior or junior) consciously or unconsciously keep rendering feedback. This
dissertation addresses the role of feedback in employee performance.
The dissertation is tested using five hypotheses to look into the various aspects of
feedback. Responders' views were requested on whether naturally occurring
feedback, receptive capability of employees, credibility of feedback provider,
elements of organization environment, and elements of employees' national culture
have any subsequent impact or any other relationship to employee performance.
The results suggested that there is a correlation between the above feedback
elements but, in relation to the variation in national culture of employees and its
impact on feedback and impact on performance, there is inconclusive support for the
hypothesis. More generally, the dissertation can provide insights into the elements
and effectiveness of feedback in organizations.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND AIMS .............................................................. 1
1.1
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Performance Management and Feedback ...................................................... 2
1.3
Changing Trends in the Usage of Feedback ................................................... 4
1.4
Problem Definition and Motivation ................................................................... 5
1.5
Research Hypotheses ..................................................................................... 6
1.6
Dissertation Structure ...................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................... 9
2.1
Talent Management Principles ...................................................................... 10
2.2
Feedback Theory........................................................................................... 18
2.3
Feedback Practice ......................................................................................... 21
2.4
Feedback from a Management Perspective .................................................. 24
2.5
Feedback from an Employee Perspective ..................................................... 25
2.6
Theoretical Framework .................................................................................. 27
2.7
Chapter Summary ......................................................................................... 29
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................. 30
3.1
Methodological Considerations...................................................................... 30
3.2
Data Collection Instrument ............................................................................ 32
3.3
Data Collection Processes, Population and Sample...................................... 37
3.4
Analysis of Data............................................................................................. 38
3.5
Validity and Reliability Issues ........................................................................ 39
3.6
Ethical Issues ................................................................................................ 41
3.7
Chapter Summary ......................................................................................... 41
CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH FINDINGS ................................................................... 43
4.1
Feedback Models and Preferences ............................................................... 43
4.2
Hypotheses Testing ....................................................................................... 45
4.2.1 Hypothesis 1: Naturally Occurring Feedback........................................ 45
4.2.2. Hypothesis 2: Receptive Capability of Employees ............................... 47
4.2.3 Hypothesis 3: Credibility of the Feedback Provider .............................. 49
4.2.4 Hypothesis 4: Organizational Environment ........................................... 50
4.2.5 Hypothesis 5: Employees’ National Culture .......................................... 52
4.3
Chapter Summary ......................................................................................... 53
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ 55
5.1
Naturally Occurring Feedback ....................................................................... 55
vi
5.2
Receptive Capability of an Employee ............................................................ 56
5.3
Credibility of Feedback Provider .................................................................... 57
5.4
Elements of Organization Environment ......................................................... 57
5.5
Elements of Employee's National Culture...................................................... 58
5.6
Recommendations......................................................................................... 59
References ............................................................................................................. 60
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1:
Talent Management Dimensions.......................................................... 17
Table 2:
Feedback to your Colleagues or Manager ........................................... 43
Table 3:
Feedback from your Colleagues or Manager ....................................... 43
Table 4
Frequency of Feedback Received from your Manager ........................ 44
Table 5
Frequency of Feedback Received from Colleagues ............................. 44
Table 6
Preferred Feedback Frequency............................................................ 45
Table 7
Cronbach's Alpha Test Result .............................................................. 45
Table 8
Hypothesis H1 Mean Value .................................................................. 46
Table 9
Correlations H1 ..................................................................................... 47
Table 10
Hypothesis H2 Mean Value .................................................................. 48
Table 11
Correlations H2 ..................................................................................... 48
Table 12
Hypothesis H3 Mean Value .................................................................. 50
Table 13
Correlations H3 ..................................................................................... 50
Table 14
Hypothesis H4 Mean Value .................................................................. 51
Table 15
Correlations H4 ..................................................................................... 52
Table 16
Hypothesis H5 Mean Value .................................................................. 53
Table 17
Correlations H5 ..................................................................................... 53
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Performance Management Process...................................................3
Variables Impacting Performance Improvement..............................28
ix
CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND AND AIMS
1.1
Introduction
There is no single definition of performance feedback. Prue & Fairbank (1981) state
that performance feedback is the information provided for past performance. Other
definitions include an information of previous behavior which helps the recipient to
improve or adjust current performance (Daniels, 2000 cited in Palmer, Johnson &
Johnson, 2015); and feedback is information given to recipient after their behavior
(Mayer, Sulzer-Azaroff, & Wallace, 2013 cited in Palmer, Johnson & Johnson, 2015).
Feedback has become a buzz word in an organization, and the practice of using
feedback either formally or informally is increasing. Formally in the sense that
feedback is captured in technologically aided systems i.e. Human Resource
Integrated System; and informally in a sense of team leaders providing weekly basis
feedback within a team. The use of weekly and end of shift feedback has been
rapidly increasing in the sales and hospitality industry, and Halford (2011) states that
people receiving feedback apply it about 30% of the time.
Feedback has been a growing concern in academia and organizations, most notably
after McKinsey’s publication of 'The War for Talent' that drove high performing
business to dive into talent management, where the philosophy of gaining
competitive advantage started focusing on human resources. With the advent of
technology and its adoption, perceptions of human resource management shifted
from Personnel Department managing personal files to the department managing
competency profiles of employees.
The leading shift in the arena of supporting human performance was the availability
of technological aids to capture and monitor feedback. Companies like Halogen,
1
TalentSoft, HR Smart, SAP, and iTalent developed a module in the software that
aided performance feedback. Due to technological support, the trend of managers
providing feedback expanded into 360- degree feedback, where a manager provides
the feedback to staff, staff provides feedback to manager, and staff provides
feedback to each other (peer feedback).
Tracing the importance of performance in output from employees goes back to the
20th century, when George Elton Mayo conducted experiments in the Hawthorne
Works (Chicago) of the General Electric Company between 1924 and 1927. The
outcome of this experiment was called the 'Hawthorne Effect', which states that
individual workers are members of a group, and that monetary incentives and
working conditions have less importance compared to the behavior of employees in
that group. Therefore managers must be aware of the social needs of employees.
This was the first scientific enquiry towards employee attitudes and the business
organization as a social system. The experiment led to the conclusion that
employees who are monitored, observed and watched by their peers are more
productive than those who are not. Similar to the conclusion of the Hawthorne Effect,
motivation theorists like Herzberg and Maslow also stated the impact of personal
relationships among employees in contributing to increased productivity.
1.2
Performance Management and Feedback
Aguinis defines performance management as a 'continuous process of identifying,
measuring, and developing the performance of individuals and teams and aligning
performance with the strategic goals of the organization' (Aguinis, 2012, p.2.). In this
process the skill set of managers makes a difference in whether employees develop
or improve; therefore managers must have the skill of coaching, observing and
2
documenting performance accurately, conducting constructive performance review
discussions, and providing feedback.
Prerequisite
Performance Planning
Performance Execution
Performance Assessment
Performance Review
Performance Renewal & Recontracting
Figure 1: Performance Management Process (Aguinis, 2012, p. 31)
As shown in the above process, performance review is a process where manager
and subordinate interact, discuss and provide feedback to each other in terms of
their development and future need of improvement. This stage is crucial, because it
is considered as the "Achilles Heel" (Aguinis, 2012, p. 50) of the entire process.
Feedback during performance review is a means by which feedback provider helps
employee to identify gap in this knowledge and skill. The good feedback process
facilitates to deliver high quality information to employee, encourages motivational
beliefs and self-esteem, and clarify what good performance is i.e. goals, criteria,
expected outcome. For this reason information disseminated to employee should be
of sufficient quality to enable them to take appropriate action. “Good feedback
comprises not just commentary about what has been done, but suggestions for what
can be done next. In particular, advice about how to improve the next element of
work can be particularly helpful to students receiving feedback, especially when this
3
advice is received during the progress of the work, so that adjustments can be made
in an ongoing manner. It can be worth checking that enough such feedforward is
being given, rather than merely feedback on what has already been done and often
dealt with”. (Conaghan & Lockey, 2009, p. 48)
1.3
Changing Trends in the Usage of Feedback
Ever since General Electric coined the performance appraisal system called “forced
ranking”, most companies adopted it, it was even enshrined in US law as the
Performance Rating Act of 1950, and it has continued its expansion all over the
corporate world. Today the same system has started to be less effective, and is
considered as a “rank and yank” system. Leading organizations are dropping the
performance appraisal out of their system and using more agile methods.
Donna Morris from Adobe started a check-in process in 2012, as a regular and
ongoing process that requires people to set their own expectations, and more focus
is devoted to the ongoing feedback. Adobe's Check-In approach revolves around a
three tiered framework (1) expectation, (2) feedback and (3) growth (Hinds, Sutton, &
Rao, 2014). Setting expectation is about setting and reviewing clear goals, feedback
is about providing and receiving ongoing feedback, and coaching and growth is
about providing opportunities to develop and increase skills and experience. The
benefit of this system is that the feedback is in real time, and managers and
employees do not have to wait for the year end to provide the feedback. 13,000 staff
use this system, and the company stock price has increased from $30 to over $80
since check-in began (Fisher, 2015a).
Similarly, Deloitte has dumped the traditional performance management system.
Deloitte research shows that 50% of managers stated that the traditional
4
performance appraisal didn't serve its purpose, and 79% stated their wish to see
their boss as both coach and mentor. The 79% expectation indicates the need of
employees to be recognized as a member of a social group, as mentioned in the
'Hawthorne Effect'.
For every year, the need to fill forms, conduct appraisals and hold meetings had
consumed 2 million hours a year in Deloitte and 80 thousand hours in Adobe. Hence,
Deloitte defined “recognize, see and fuel” as three objectives at the root of
performance management; with a ritual of supporting employees by weekly check-in,
quarterly or per-project performance, and annual compensation decisions, which is a
shift towards more frequent conversation (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015).
1.4
Problem Definition and Motivation
This research aims to identify the role of performance feedback in employee
performance, and contribute to the literature by investigating the impact of feedback
on individual performance. The research topic problem is to explore the extent to
which the organizational culture, operating environment, and employees' orientation
towards feedback help an employee in improving their performance.
What motivates the researcher in the examination of the impact of feedback is the
increasing interest of scholars and organizations. General Electric was the company
that started forced ranking, adopted by most of the organizations, and now the shift
has changed. As mentioned above in 1.3, the increasing trend towards the
integration of feedback, coaching and one-to-one conversation has encouraged the
researcher to test his hypotheses and contribute to the existing literature.
5
1.5
Research Hypotheses
The idea of testing hypotheses follows naturally from adoption of a positivist
methodology and a survey approach to collecting quantitative data. The research
design is based on testing the below hypotheses:
•
H1: There is a positive correlation between the level of naturally occurring
feedback and the subsequent performance of an employee
•
H2:There is a positive correlation between the receptive capability of an
employee and the performance of an employee.
•
H3:There is a positive correlation between the credibility of the feedback provider
and the performance of an employee.
•
H4:There is a positive correlation between the elements of an organization
environment and the performance of an employee.
•
H5:There is a positive correlation between the elements of an employee's
national culture and the performance of an employee.
Through the above hypotheses the researcher examined the elements in an
organizational environment to identify whether or not the literature has identified any
gap between practices. One of the theories contributing to feedback is Feedback
Intervention Theory (FES) where, according to Kluger & DeNisi (1996), feedback
changes the locus of attention at the level of controls like task learning, task
motivation and meta-task, which then increases the performance of recipients.
Because feedback can be impacted by cultural diversity within the workforce, the
locus of attention as stated by Kluger & DeNisi (1996) might be affected by the
national culture of employees.
The credibility of feedback providers is another area of exploration that questioned
whether or not the knowledge, experience and skill of leadership affect the impact on
6
feedback receiver. Steelman, Levy & Snell (2004) state that the source of credibility
is the level of expertise and trustworthiness. The feedback provider must have the
ability to observe the behavior of recipients, the ability to evaluate, and have a
motive to render feedback which creates trustworthiness in recipients. Concurrently,
knowledge of job requirements and the actual performance of recipients becomes
the source of expertise. Likewise, favorable and unfavorable feedbacks are another
important component of FES.
Promoting a feedback-seeking environment and behavior, as stated by Steelman,
Levy & Snell (2004), is another area of exploration in research. And, according to
Stobbeleir, Ashform & Buyens (2011), self-regulatory behavior can foster creativity
and better outcomes, which implies that organizations must equally focus on
employees’ feedback-seeking behaviors, self-regulation tactics, and self-efficacy
(Brown, Ganesan & Challagalla, 2001). The practice of training employees can also
help employees to develop attachment among peers, which supports the need for
higher engagement in feedback inquiry. 'We suggest that relational dispositions may
be important in shaping who seeks feedback, as well as the extent to which
feedback seeking enhances performance' (Wu, Parker & Jong, 2014, p. 442).
Another prominent factor that makes feedback more effective is the individual's
overall receptivity to feedback, known as the Feedback Orientation Scale (FOS)
hereafter (Linderbaum & Levy, 2010). The authors further state that individual
differences in the receptivity to feedback are measured by defensiveness, utility,
accountability, self-efficacy and social awareness. Defensiveness measures the
individual's tendency to dislike or react to feedback negatively, while Utility measures
the threshold of individual belief leading to better outcomes. Accountability refers to
the individuals' ability to feel obliged to follow up and react, self-efficacy refers to
7
recipients' competence to interpret and absorb feedback and respond appropriately.
Social Awareness measures the recipient's tendency to be aware of other views and
sensitivity towards them. Hence, this research examines the impact of feedback
orientation on an employee, because reaction to feedback is a more critical influence
on work performance than feedback itself(Kluger & DeNisi, 1996).
1.6
Dissertation Structure
The research continues with the chapters detailing literature review, research
methods, research analysis, and recommendations for further research.
The literature review provides details on the existing literature, case studies and
practices that exist in connection with performance review. It is an extensive
presentation of the peer reviewed journals and literature. Methodology provides an
overview of how the research was conducted, how the data were collected, how
many participants participated, how the ethical responsibilities were considered.
The collected data from questionnaires are analyzed in chapter four and results
presented in terms of what the researcher found during the analysis. The last
chapter concludes by analyzing the research gap by differentiating the existing
practice from the literature. The recommendations for further study and
improvements in practice are then presented by the researcher.
8
View publication stats