An examination of team reactions to negative performance feedback and their relationship to team performance
MetadataShow full item record
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.
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