The opportunity to have vertical mobility, to grow in a career sense, and to be promoted to higher levels of responsibility, is endemic to the American culture. Yet, most managers reach a career plateau before they reach the top. What happens when this occurs? What is the effect on job performance? Using both self and organizational responses, 384 middle level managers were partitioned into various likelihood of promotion and degree of mutuality groups. A comparison off the pattern of factors associated with groups of high and low likelihood of promotion suggests these groups are independent. A similar comparison of groups with varying degrees bf mutuality indicates these groups are independent also. A comparison employing the source of assessment (individual or organization) did not produce significant differences. Thus, both likelihood of promotion and mutuality appear useful in further clarifying the nature of managerial work motivation. Implications of these results are discussed from both individual and organizational perspectives.

An information-processing model was used to study the critical inferences involved in evaluating the usefulness of job performance feedback. Participants were asked to imagine themselves in a variety of job situations in which they received different types of feedback and to evaluate its usefulness. The findings indicate that a multidimensional model is required to represent the evaluation process and that individuals differ both in terms of the feedback dimensions they attend to, and the importance they ascribe to each dimension. Results are discussed in terms of feedback's potential effect on behaviour.The continued emphasis on increasing individual performance is essential for most firms desiring to remain effective in the face of increasing world competition. The dictate from the performance feedback literature is clear: specific, direct, timely and accurate feedback from a credible, trustworthy expert increases levels of job performance. Equally well established is the evidence that feedback does not always produce the predicted results. What accounts for this discrepancy? When do the expected patterns occur? When is specific, direct, timely and accurate feedback from a credible, trustworthy expert insufficient to increase job performance? The research presented in this paper seeks to clarify these issues by investigating the conditions leading to acknowledgement and use of performance feedback by organization members.The set of studies examining the relationship between feedback and its influence on subsequent behaviour and attitudes is extensive. The three major areas of feedback research are: the role of feedback in learning and changing levels of performance (e.g.,