Eliciting Advice Instead of Feedback Improves Developmental Input

References

• Abel JE, Vani P, Abi-Esber N, Blunden H, Schroeder J (2022) Kindness in short supply: Evidence for inadequate prosocial input. Current Opinion Psych. 48:101458.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abi-Esber N, Abel JE, Schroeder J, Gino F (2022) “Just letting you know…” Underestimating others’ desire for constructive feedback. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 123(6):1362–1385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• AllVoices (2021) State of employee feedback 2021. (May 14), https://www.allvoices.co/blog/state-of-employee-feedback-2021.Google Scholar
• Alvero AM, Bucklin BR, Austin J (2001) An objective review of the effectiveness and essential characteristics of performance feedback in organizational settings (1985–1998). J. Organ. Behav. Management 21(1):3–29.Google Scholar
• Anseel F, Beatty AS, Shen W, Lievens F, Sackett PR (2015) How are we doing after 30 years? A meta-analytic review of the antecedents and outcomes of feedback-seeking behavior. J. Management 41(1):318–348.Google Scholar
• Argyris C (1982) The executive mind and double-loop learning. Organ. Dynam. 11(2):5–22. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aron A, Aron EN, Smollan D (1992) Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 63(4):596–612Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashford SJ, De Stobbeleir K, Nujella M (2016) To seek or not to seek: Is that the only question? Recent developments in feedback-seeking literature. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 3:213–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bailey AA (2015) “Oh, stop! You flatter me”: ingratiation in retail settings. Internat. J. Retail Distribution Management 43(9):895–915.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balliet D, Ferris DL (2013) Ostracism and prosocial behavior: A social dilemma perspective. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 120(2):298–308.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF, Vohs KD, Oettingen G (2016) Pragmatic prospection: How and why people think about the future. Rev. General Psych. 20(1):3–16.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Becker TE, Atinc G, Breaugh JA, Carlson KD, Edwards JR, Spector PE (2016) Statistical control in correlational studies: 10 essential recommendations for organizational researchers. J. Organ. Behav. 37(2):157–167.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernerth JB, Aguinis H (2016) A critical review and best‐practice recommendations for control variable usage. Personnel Psych. 69(1):229–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Biesanz JC, Human LJ (2010) The cost of forming more accurate impressions: Accuracy-motivated perceivers see the personality of others more distinctively but less normatively than perceivers without an explicit goal. Psych. Sci. 21(4):589–594.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blaine B, Crocker J (1993) Self-esteem and self-serving biases in reactions to positive and negative events: An integrative review. Baumeister RF, ed. Self-Esteem: The Puzzle of Low Self-Regard (Springer, New York), 55–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blakely GL (1993) The effects of performance rating discrepancies on supervisors and subordinates. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 54(1):57–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bluedorn AC (2002) The Human Organization of Time: Temporal Realities and Experience (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blunden H, Green P, Gino F (2020) Distance and detail: Psychological distance promotes specific feedback delivery. Talk given at the Program on Negotiations Meeting, Virtual.Google Scholar
• Blunden H, Logg JM, Brooks AW, John LK, Gino F (2019) Seeker beware: The interpersonal costs of ignoring advice. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 150:83–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonaccio S, Dalal RS (2006) Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 101(2):127–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boswell WR, Boudreau JW (2002) Separating the developmental and evaluative performance appraisal uses. J. Bus. Psych. 16:391–412.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brutus S (2010) Words versus numbers: A theoretical exploration of giving and receiving narrative comments in performance appraisal. Human Resource Management Rev. 20(2):144–157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Butler R (1987) Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. J. Educational Psych. 79(4):474–482.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Butler AC, Karpicke JD, Roediger HL III (2007) The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests. J. Experiment. Psych. Appl. 13(4):273–281.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cannon MD, Witherspoon R (2005) Actionable feedback: Unlocking the power of learning and performance improvement. Acad. Management Perspect. 19(2):120–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Capraro V, Vanzo A (2019) The power of moral words: Loaded language generates framing effects in the extreme dictator game. Judgment Decision Making 14(3):309–317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Çelen B, Kariv S, Schotter A (2010) An experimental test of advice and social learning. Management Sci. 56(10):1687–1701.Link, Google Scholar
• Cojuharenco I, Patient D, Bashshur MR (2011) Seeing the “forest” or the “trees” of organizational justice: Effects of temporal perspective on employee concerns about unfair treatment at work. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 116(1):17–31.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Correll S, Simard C (2016) Vague feedback is holding women back. Harvard Bus. Rev. 94(1):2–5.Google Scholar
• Correll SJ, Weisshaar KR, Wynn AT, Wehner JD (2020) Inside the black box of organizational life: The gendered language of performance assessment. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 85(6):1022–1050.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cross R, Borgatti SP, Parker A (2001) Beyond answers: Dimensions of the advice network. Soc. Networks 23(3):215–235.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dalal RS, Bonaccio S (2010) What types of advice do decision-makers prefer? Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 112(1):11–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Kraker-Pauw E, Van Wesel F, Krabbendam L, Van Atteveldt N (2017) Teacher mindsets concerning the malleability of intelligence and the appraisal of achievement in the context of feedback. Frontiers Psych. 8:1594.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeCapua A, Dunham JF (1993) Strategies in the discourse of advice. J. Pragmatics 20(6):519–531.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeCapua A, Huber L (1995) ‘If I were you…’: Advice in American English. Multilingua 14(2):117–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, Kim W, Linos E (2024) Bottlenecks for evidence adoption. J. Political Econom. 132(8):2748–2789. Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeNisi AS, Pritchard RD (2006) Performance appraisal, performance management and improving individual performance: A motivational framework. Management Organ. Rev. 2(2):253–277.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeNisi A, Smith CE (2014) Performance appraisal, performance management, and firm-level performance: A review, a proposed model, and new directions for future research. Acad. Management Ann. 8(1):127–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dibble JL (2018) It’s more than self-presentation: Mum effects can reflect private discomfort and concern for the recipient. Communication Res. Rep. 35(2):112–120.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Earley PC, Northcraft GB, Lee C, Lituchy TR (1990) Impact of process and outcome feedback on the relation of goal setting to task performance. Acad. Management J. 33(1):87–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson A (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):350–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Finkelstein SR, Fishbach A, Tu Y (2017) When friends exchange negative feedback. Motivation Emotion 41(1):69–83.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Foo MD, Uy MA, Baron RA (2009) How do feelings influence effort? An empirical study of entrepreneurs’ affect and venture effort. J. Appl. Psych. 94(4):1086–1094.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galinsky AD, Gruenfeld DH, Magee JC (2003) From power to action. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 85(3):453–466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gallus J, Bhatia S (2020) Gender, power and emotions in the collaborative production of knowledge: A large-scale analysis of Wikipedia editor conversations. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 160:115–130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Geister S, Konradt U, Hertel G (2006) Effects of process feedback on motivation, satisfaction, and performance in virtual teams. Small Group Res. 37(5):459–489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gnepp J, Klayman J, Williamson IO, Barlas S (2020) The future of feedback: Motivating performance improvement through future-focused feedback. PLoS One 15(6):e0234444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goldsmith DJ, Fitch K (1997) The normative context of advice as social support. Human Communication Res. 23(4):454–476.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goodman JS, Wood RE, Hendrickx M (2004) Feedback specificity, exploration, and learning. J. Appl. Psych. 89(2):248–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grant AM, Campbell EM, Chen G, Cottone K, Lapedis D, Lee K (2007) Impact and the art of motivation maintenance: The effects of contact with beneficiaries on persistence behavior. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 103(1):53–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gregory JB, Levy PE (2015) Using Feedback in Organizational Consulting (American Psychological Association, Washington, DC).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guo T, Ji LJ, Spina R, Zhang Z (2012) Culture, temporal focus, and values of the past and the future. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 38(8):1030–1040.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harvey JF, Green P Jr (2022) Constructive feedback: When leader agree ableness stifles team reflexivity. Personality Individual Differences 194:111624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hertz U, Bell V, Raihani N (2021) Trusting and learning from others: Immediate and long- term effects of learning from observation and advice. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 288(1961):20211414.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hinds PJ, Patterson M, Pfeffer J (2001) Bothered by abstraction: The effect of expertise on knowledge transfer and subsequent novice performance. J. Appl. Psych. 86(6):1232–1243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hütter M, Fiedler K (2019) Advice taking under uncertainty: The impact of genuine advice versus arbitrary anchors on judgment. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 85:103829.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ilgen DR, Fisher CD, Taylor MS (1979) Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. J. Appl. Psych. 64(4):349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ilgen DR, Mitchell TR, Fredrickson JW (1981) Poor performers: Supervisors’ and subordinates’ responses. Organ. Behav. Human Perform. 27(3):386–410.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Imai K, Keele L, Tingley D, Yamamoto T (2010) Causal mediation analysis using R. Vinod H, ed. Advances in Social Science Research Using R (Springer, New York), 129–154.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jampol L, Zayas V (2021) Gendered white lies: Women are given inflated performance feedback compared with men. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 47(1):57–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• John LK, Blunden H, Liu H (2019) Shooting the messenger. J. Experiment. Psych. General 148(4):644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kappes A, Wendt M, Reinelt T, Oettingen G (2013) Mental contrasting changes the meaning of reality. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 49(5):797–810.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kay AC, Ross L (2003) The perceptual push: The interplay of implicit cues and explicit situational construals on behavioral intentions in the Prisoner’s Dilemma. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 39(6):634–643.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keiser NL, Arthur W Jr (2021) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of the after-action review (or debrief) and factors that influence its effectiveness. J. Appl. Psych. 106(7):1007–1032.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kluger AN, DeNisi A (1996) The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psych. Bull. 119(2):254.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kluger AN, Nir D (2010) The feedforward interview. Human Resource Management Rev. 20(3):235–246.Google Scholar
• Kluger AN, Van Dijk D (2010) Feedback, the various tasks of the doctor, and the feedforward alternative. Medical Ed. 44(12):1166–1174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kogan JR, Conforti LN, Bernabeo EC, Durning SJ, Hauer KE, Holmboe ES (2012) Faculty staff perceptions of feedback to residents after direct observation of clinical skills. Medical Ed. 46(2):201–215.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kopelman RE (1986) Objective feedback. Locke EA, ed. Generalizing from the Laboratory to Field Settings (Lexington Books, Lexington, MA), 119–146.Google Scholar
• Kramer RM (2015) Worth a second look?: Exploring the power of post-mortems on post-mortems. Elsbach KD, Kramer RM, eds. Handbook of Qualitative Organizational Research (Routledge, London), 411–420.Google Scholar
• Lambert B, Caza BB, Trinh E, Ashford S (2022) Individual-centered interventions: Identifying what, how, and why interventions work in organizational contexts. Acad. Management Ann. 16(2):508–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lamont M (2012) Toward a comparative sociology of valuation and evaluation. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 38(1):201–221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Landis B, Fisher CM, Menges JI (2022) How employees react to unsolicited and solicited advice in the workplace: Implications for using advice, learning, and performance. J. Appl. Psych. 107(3):408–424.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lawson MA, Martin AE, Huda I, Matz SC (2022) Hiring women into senior leadership positions is associated with a reduction in gender stereotypes in organizational language. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 119(9):e2026443119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levari D, Gilbert DT, Wilson TD (2022) Tips from the top: Do the best performers really give the best advice? Psych. Sci. 33(5):685–698.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levine EE, Roberts AR, Cohen TR (2020) Difficult conversations: Navigating the tension between honesty and benevolence. Current Opinion Psych. 31:38–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liang H, Marquis C, Renneboog L, Sun SL (2018) Future-time framing: The effect of language on corporate future orientation. Organ. Sci. 29(6):1093–1111.Link, Google Scholar
• Liden RC, Mitchell TR (1985) Reactions to feedback: The role of attributions. Acad. Management J. 28(2):291–308.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liden RC, Ferris GR, Dienesch RM (1988) The influence of causal feedback on subordinate reactions and behavior. Group Organ. Stud. 13(3):348–373.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lim JH, Tai K, Bamberger PA, Morrison EW (2020) Soliciting resources from others: An integrative review. Acad. Management Ann. 14(1):122–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lix K, Goldberg A, Srivastava SB, Valentine MA (2022) Aligning differences: Discursive diversity and team performance. Management Sci. 68(11):8430–8448.Link, Google Scholar
• London M, Beatty RW (1993) 360‐degree feedback as a competitive advantage. Human Resource Management 32(2–3):353–372.Crossref, Google Scholar
• London M, Smither JW (2002) Feedback orientation, feedback culture, and the longitudinal performance management process. Human Resource Management Rev. 12(1):81–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Martinez A (2023) 360-degree feedback programs to help your company grow. HR Digest (November 27), https://www.thehrdigest.com/360-degree-feedback-programs-to-help-your-company-grow/.Google Scholar
• Meyer HH (1991) A solution to the performance appraisal feedback enigma. Acad. Management Perspect. 5(1):68–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Milkman KL, Rogers T, Bazerman MH (2009) Highbrow films gather dust: Time-inconsistent preferences and online DVD rentals. Management Sci. 55(6):1047–1059.Link, Google Scholar
• Milyavsky M, Gvili Y (2024) Advice taking vs. combining opinions: Framing social information as advice increases source’s perceived helping intentions, trust, and influence. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 183:104328.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mishra G, Farooqi R (2013) Exploring employee satisfaction with performance management and the challenges faced in context of IT industry. Compensation Benefits Rev. 45(6):329–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murphy KR (2020) Performance evaluation will not die, but it should. Human Res. Management J. 30(1):13–31.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Myllyaho M, Salo O, Kääriäinen J, Hyysalo J, Koskela J (2004) A review of small and large post-mortem analysis methods. 17th Internat. Conf. Software Systems Eng. Appl. (IEEE France, Paris), 1–9. Google Scholar
• Oettingen G, Pak HJ, Schnetter K (2001) Self-regulation of goal-setting: Turning free fantasies about the future into binding goals. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 80(5):736–753.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pearce JL, Porter LW (1986) Employee responses to formal performance appraisal feedback. J. Appl. Psych. 71(2):211–218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petrinovich L, O’Neill P (1996) Influence of wording and framing effects on moral intuitions. Ethology Sociobiology 17(3):145–171.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pica G, Jaume LC, Pierro A (2022) Let’s go forward, I forgive you! On motivational correlates of interpersonal forgiveness. Current Psych. 41(10):6786–6794.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, Farh JL (1989) Effects of feedback sign and credibility on goal setting and task performance. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 44(1):45–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reskin BF, McBrier DB (2000) Why not ascription? Organizations’ employment of male and female managers. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 65(2):210–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reyt JN, Wiesenfeld BM, Trope Y (2016) Big picture is better: The social implications of construal level for advice taking. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 135:22–31.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schaerer M, Kern M, Berger G, Medvec V, Swaab RI (2018a) The illusion of transparency in performance appraisals: When and why accuracy motivation explains unintentional feedback inflation. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 144:171–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schaerer M, Tost LP, Huang L, Gino F, Larrick R (2018b) Advice giving: A subtle pathway to power. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 44(5):746–761.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schmidt C (2021) How employee feedback has evolved and where it’s headed next. Forbes (August 20), https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2021/08/20/how-employee-feedback-has-evolved-and-where-its-headed-next/.Google Scholar
• Shipp AJ, Cole MS (2015) Time in individual-level organizational studies: What is it, how is it used, and why isn’t it exploited more often? Annu. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 2(1):237–260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shipp AJ, Edwards JR, Lambert LS (2009) Conceptualization and measurement of temporal focus: The subjective experience of the past, present, and future. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 110(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shute VJ (2008) Focus on formative feedback. Rev. Educational Res. 78(1):153–189.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith KG, Locke EA, Barry D (1990) Goal setting, planning, and organizational performance: An experimental simulation. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 46(1):118–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Srivastava SB, Goldberg A, Manian VG, Potts C (2018) Enculturation trajectories: Language, cultural adaptation, and individual outcomes in organizations. Management Sci. 64(3):1348–1364.Link, Google Scholar
• Steelman LA, Levy PE, Snell AF (2004) The feedback environment scale: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Educational Psych. Measurement 64(1):165–184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stephens NM, Rivera LA, Townsend SS (2020) What works to increase diversity? A multi-level approach. Res. Organ. Behav. 39:1–51.Google Scholar
• Strelan P, Covic T (2006) A review of forgiveness process models and a coping framework to guide future research. J. Soc. Clinical Psych. 25(10):1059–1085.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sutton R, Wigert B (2019) More harm than good: The truth about performance reviews. Gallup (May 6), https://www.gallup.com/workplace/249332/harm-good-truth-performance-reviews.aspx.Google Scholar
• Taras M (2005) Assessment—Summative and formative—Some theoretical reflections. British J. Educational Stud. 53(4):466–478.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tausczik YR, Pennebaker JW (2010) The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. J. Language Soc. Psych. 29(1):24–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taylor MS, Fisher CD, Ilgen DR (1984) Individual’s reactions to performance feedback in organizations: A control theory perspective. Rowland KM, Ferris GR, eds. Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, vol. 2 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 81–124.Google Scholar
• Venaik S, Zhu Y, Brewer P (2013) Looking into the future: Hofstede long term orientation versus GLOBE future orientation. Cross Cultural Management Internat. J. 20(3):361–385.Google Scholar
• Waung M, Highhouse S (1997) Fear of conflict and empathic buffering: Two explanations for the inflation of performance feedback. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 71(1):37–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wigert B, Harter J (2017) Re-engineering performance management. Accessed June 21, 2022, https://www.gallup.com/workplace/238064/re-engineering-performance-management.aspx.Google Scholar
• Yaniv I (2004) Receiving other people’s advice: Influence and benefit. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 93(1):1–13.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yeomans M (2021) A concrete example of construct construction in natural language. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 162:81–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yeomans M, Minson J, Collins H, Chen F, Gino F (2020) Conversational receptiveness: Improving engagement with opposing views. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 160:131–148.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zeileis A, Köll S, Graham N (2020) Various versatile variances: an object-oriented implementation of clustered covariances in R. J. Statist. Software 95:1–36.Google Scholar
• Zhou J (2003) When the presence of creative coworkers is related to creativity: Role of supervisor close monitoring, developmental feedback, and creative personality. J. Appl. Psych. 88(3):413–422.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zimbardo PG, Boyd JN (2015) Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Stolarski M, Fieulaine N, van Beek W, eds. Time Perspective Theory; Review, Research and Application: Essays in Honor of Philip G. Zimbardo (Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland), 17–55.Crossref, Google Scholar