Skip to main content

The effects of relative performance information and

framed information systems feedback on performance in a production task

Introduction

Thomas Gilbert cautions that the cells  in his Behavior Engineering model be viewed not as a “disjointed sum of six mechanical parts,” but as closely interrelated elements contributing to performance of a task. As such, changes in one cell are very likely to lead to changes in others.  The  following research assesses the links between different types of performance feedback (data) and their impact on incentives, worker motivation, and performance.

Article

Murthy, U. S., & Schafer, B. A. (2011). The effects of relative performance information and framed information systems feedback on performance in a production task.  Journal of Information Systems, 25(1), 159-184. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/jis.2011.25.1.159

Research Background

The impact of feedback on worker performance has been the subject of extensive research focused on feedback from humans. Such research supports the hypothesis that both positively and negatively framed feedback (data) result in increased effort (motivation) toward achieving desired performance goals.

Researchers at a large Southeastern U.S. university sought to investigate the effectiveness of several types of computer-generated feedback provided to workers while they were engaged in a simple decoding task on their computer. Research was conducted with 256 undergraduate students enrolled in a basic accounting class.  The types of feedback they received were:

  1. UNFRAMED FEEDBACK in the form of a simple count of number correct versus number incorrect;
  2. FRAMED FEEDBACK in the form of positive wording (you performed well) or negative wording (you performed poorly);
  3. RELATIVE PERFORMANCE INFORMATION (RPI) in the form of positive wording (you performed better than X percentage of participants) or negative wording (you performed worse than X number of participants).

The experiment tested the following hypotheses:

  • H1. Participants provided with relative performance feedback will improve performance more than participants not provided with relative performance feedback.
  • H2. Participants provided with positively or negatively framed feedback will improve performance more than participants not provided with framed feedback.
  • H3. Feedback framing (none, positive, or negative) will interact with workers’ performance level, such that lower-level performers will improve more in response to framed feedback than higher-level performers.

Each participant was assigned the task of decoding numbers into letters using a decoding key in a web-based application. Some participants were told they would be paid based on their number of correct decodings. Others were told they would be compensated a fixed amount whether they decoded correctly or not.  Each student participated in three decoding sessions, with feedback provided after the second and third sessions.

The experiment used a 3 X 4 X 2 design, whereby feedback framing (none, positive, negative), relative performance feedback (no RPI, rank-ordered RPI, percentage RPI after session 2, percentage RPI after session 3) and payment type (fixed or variable) were crossed.

Research Findings

Results indicate support for Hypothesis 1, in that providing RPI feedback improved performance more than when such feedback was not provided. In testing Hypothesis 2, researchers found support for more significant improvement in performance with positive framed feedback than with unframed feedback. However, performance improvement differences between negatively framed feedback and unframed feedback were indistinguishable overall. Finally, results for Hypothesis 3 indicate that low performers showed greater performance improvement with positive framed feedback than did high performers, although high performers did respond more strongly to negatively framed feedback more so than to unframed feedback.

It should be noted that researchers found no significant variation in performance by salary type (fixed or variable), likely due to minimal difference between the rates being paid.

Questions for IPT-N Members

Do you think this research’s findings are applicable to your work situation as well?  More specifically, do you feel more motivated to perform, and actually perform better, when you receive positive and comparative feedback? Do you provide such feedback to your employees? Would your low performers and high performers respond to positive and negative feedback differently?

Do you think the effect of continuous positively framed feedback can diminish if provided too frequently? What are your ‘lessons-learned’ when you provide feedback to engineer workers’ performance?

Workplace Oriented Research Central (WORC)
Prepared by OPWL Graduate Assistant, Susan Virgilio
Directed by OPWL Professor, Yonnie Chyung
Posted on October 30, 2012