Feedback perceptions and attribution by secretarial employees

Abstract

Purpose – Theoretical explanations for the diverse reactive feedback from secretarial employees in different career phases are relatively unexplored. However, research examining age differences in the impact of feedback suggests that the effects of performance feedback may differ for employees in the early career phase and employees in the late career phase. This paper aims to address this issue. Design/methodology/approach – This contribution reports an experimental study on feedback perceptions and attribution by 173 secretarial employees of 12 Dutch organizations. Each participant responded to one of eight scenarios, which varied in terms of feedback content, sender status, and sender performance appraisal. Feedback perceptions were measured in terms of perceived fairness, acceptance, usefulness, willingness to improve and affect. An additional scale measured attribution. Findings – The results reveal that elaborated specific feedback is perceived as more adequate, irrespective of feedback sender status and appraisal. Complex three-way interaction effects were found for educational level on affect and attribution, and for career phase on willingness to improve and affect. Low-educated employees reacted more strongly to supervisor feedback. Employees in the late career phase were more oriented towards the content of the feedback than feedback sender status, whereas the latter was of more concern for employees in the early and middle career phase. Practical implications – In order for feedback to be considered as adequate, it is necessary to formulate the feedback as specific and as elaborated as possible. Employees in their late career phase especially react differently in comparison to employees in early and middle career phases. They are more inclined “to opt for quality” and appreciate elaborated feedback from a high experienced sender. Human resource managers should be aware of this in their policy towards employees in their late career phase Originality/value – The present study shows that feedback content and sender characteristics (status and performance appraisal) differentially affect feedback perceptions and attribution. In addition, the study reveals that perceptions and attributions of performance feedback might be mediated by educational level and career phase.

Application of Formalised Developmental Feedback for Feed-Forward to Foster Student Ownership of the Learning Process

“…Raemdonck and Strijbos (2013) found support for the notion of more elaborate specific feedback being perceived to be more adequate, and to result in more willingness to improve with more positive affect, which is attributed internally. Yorke (2003) suggests that learning depends on knowledge of results at a time and place where the knowledge can be used for development.…”

Exploring the Impact of Receiving Sender‐Based Negative and Positive Feedback on Team‐Level Process Outcomes Using a Mobile Application

“…Although prior research supports the general validity of each scale (London et al, 1997;Raemdonck & Strijbos, 2013;Rudawsky et al, 1999), the authors could not find previous empirical research when using a mobile app for receiving online real-time negative or positive peer-related feedback. Although prior research supports the general validity of each scale (London et al, 1997;Raemdonck & Strijbos, 2013;Rudawsky et al, 1999), the authors could not find previous empirical research when using a mobile app for receiving online real-time negative or positive peer-related feedback.…”

“…In the context of receiving both negative and positive feedback, three new feedback scales were found: sender explain; trust sender; and sender identify self. Although prior research supports the general validity of each scale (London et al, 1997;Raemdonck & Strijbos, 2013;Rudawsky et al, 1999), the authors could not find previous empirical research when using a mobile app for receiving online real-time negative or positive peer-related feedback. The sender identify self-scale had a marginal reliability in this study.…”

Human resource practices and migrant workers' turnover intentions: The roles of post‐migration place identity and justice perceptions

“…Acknowledging that other personal characteristics such as education (Raemdonck & Strijbos, 2013), nationality (Chiang & Birtch, 2007), and emotions (Dasborough & Ashkanasy, 2002) may also impact the attribution process, we need to explore what makes place identity stable and coherent as part of self-verification (Swann & Ely, 1984) and, therefore, a salient attribution factor. Justice perceptions, according to the just-world theory (Furnham, 2003), are important for migrant workers' self-verification of place identity.…”