An examination of team reactions to negative performance feedback and their relationship to team performance
Abstract
Despite the abundant research regarding individual-level feedback, few studies
examine team feedback, particularly the relationship between team feedback reactions and
organizational performance. Through a field study and a lab study, this paper examines two
reactions to team feedback, specifically blaming and strategizing, and their relationship to
team performance. Study 1 showed that both blaming and strategizing occur in about 1/3 of
team feedback meetings in an international sample of teams. Blaming was found to
negatively correlate with productivity improvement (r = -.59), whereas strategizing was
found to positively correlate with productivity improvement (r = .33). Study 2 was a lab
study conducted to addresses several of the limitations from Study 1. The results from Study
2 were mixed. Although the manipulation failed to differentiate the experimental conditions
in Study 2, post hoc correlational analyses showed a positive relationship between
strategizing and viability, and a negative relationship between excuse making and viability.
Correlational analyses also revealed a negative relationship between blaming or excuse
making and team cohesion. These results suggest further research is warranted in this area.
Citation
Philo, Joel Richard (2004). An examination of team reactions to negative performance feedback and their relationship to team performance. Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University. Texas A&M University. Available electronically from https : / /hdl .handle .net /1969 .1 /1555.