This study examines the effects of introducing an ongoing feedback system into 10 branches of a Midwestern bank. The feedback system was designed to facilitate collaborative control and problem solving in the branches and was hypothesized to raise the level of participation in the branches and increase their effectiveness.
The effects of the new feedback system were evaluated by observing its use and by comparing questionnaire and archival information from the experimental branches with similar data collected from 10 branches where the feedback system was not implemented.
The results of the study indicated that the new feedback system produced functional consequences in some of the work groups in the experimental branches, but not in others. It appeared that in some cases the consequences were due to an increase in participative control processes, while in others, they were due to an increase in directive management. It is concluded that the effects of different feedback system designs are probably contingent on contextual factors such as the problem-solving skills and orientations of organization members, the nature of the reward systems existing in the organization, and task and individual differences among work units.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alderfer, C. P.Improving organizational communication through long-term intergroup intervention. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1977, 13, 193-210.
2.
Ansari, S. L.Behavioral factors in variance control: Report on a laboratory experiment. Journal of Accounting Research, 1976, 14, 189-211.
3.
Argyris, C.The impact of budgets on people. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University School of Business and Public Administration, 1952.
4.
Argyris, C.Integrating the individual and the organization. New York: John Wiley, 1964.
5.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D.A.Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1978.
6.
Baumgartel, H.Using employee questionnaire results for improving organizations: The survey "feedback" experiment. Kansas Business Review, 1959, 12 (12), 2-6.
7.
Blau, P. M.Bureaucracy in modern society. New York: Random House, 1956.
8.
Bowers, D. G., & Franklin, J. L.Survey-guided development: Data based organization change. Lajolla, Calif.: University Associates, 1977.
9.
Cammann, C.Effects of the use of control systems. Accounting, Organizations & Society, 1976, 1(4), 301-313.
10.
Cammann, C., & Nadler, D. A.Fit control system to your management style. Harvard Business Review, 1976, 54 (1), 65-72.
11.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C.Experimental and quasi-experimental design for research. Chicago: Rand-McNally & Co., 1963.
12.
Caplan, E. H.Management accounting and behavioral science. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1971.
13.
Chandler, A. D., Jr.Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of the industrial enterprise. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1962.
14.
Cronback, L. J., & Furby, L.How should we measure "change"-or should we?Psychological Bulletin, 1970, 74, 68-80.
15.
Davis, S. M., & Lawrence, P. R.Matrix. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1976.
16.
Galbraith, J. R.Designing complex organizations. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1973.
17.
Galbraith, J. R.Organization design. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1977.
18.
Hackman, J. R.Work design. In J. R. Hackman & J. L. Sattle, Improving life at work: Behavioral science approaches to organizational change. Santa Monica, Calif.: Goodyear, 1977.
19.
Harris, C. W.Problems in measuring change. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1967.
20.
Hofstede, G. H.The game of budget control. Assen, Netherlands: Van Gorcum, 1967.
21.
Hopwood, A. G.An accounting system and managerial behavior. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1973.
22.
Jasinski, F. J.Use and misuse of efficiency controls. Harvard Business Review, 1956, 34, 105-112.
23.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L.The social psychology of organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1966.
24.
Kilman, R. H., Pondy, L. R., & Slevin, D. P.The management of organization design. New York: North-Holland, 1976.
25.
Klein, S. M., Kraut, A. I., & Wolfson, A.Employee reactions to attitude survey feedback: A study of the impact of structure and process. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1971, 16, 497-514.
26.
Lawler, E. E., & Rhode, J. G.Information and control in organizations. Pacific Palisades, Calif.: Goodyear, 1976.
27.
Lawrence, P. R.The changing of organizational behavior patterns. Boston: Division of Research, Harvard Business School, 1958.
28.
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W.Developing organizations: Diagnosis and action. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1969.
29.
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W.Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Homewood, Ill.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1967.
30.
Likert, R.The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
31.
Locke, E. A., Cartledge, N., & Koeppel, J.Motivational effects of knowledge of results: A goal-setting phenomenon. Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 70, 474-485.
32.
Luke, R. A., Block, P., Davey, J. M., & Averch, V. R.A structural approach to organizational change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1973, 9, 611-635.
33.
Mann, F. C.Studying and creating change: A means to understanding social organization. In C. M. Arensberg et al. (Eds.), Research in industrial human relations: A critical appraisal. New York: Harper, 1957.
34.
Mann, F. C., & Likert, R.The need for research on the communication of research results. Human Organization, 1952, 11, 15-19.
35.
Mohrman, S., Mohrman, A., Cooke, R., & Duncan, R.A survey feedback and problem solving intervention in a school district: We'll take the survey but you can keep the feedback. In P. Mirvis & D. Berg (Eds.), Failure in organization development and change. New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1977. Pp. 147-190.
36.
Mumford, E., & Banks, O.The computer and the clerk. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967.
37.
Nadler, D. A.Feedback and organization development: Using data based methods. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1977.
38.
Nadler, D. A.Using feedback for organizational change: Promises and pitfalls. Group and Organizational Studies, 1976, 1, 177-186.
39.
Porter, L. W., Lawler, E. E., & Hackman, J. R.Behavior in organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.
40.
Rice, A. K.Productivity and social organization: The Ahmedabad experiment. London: Tavistock Publications, 1958.
41.
Stedry, A. C., & Kay, E.The effects of goal difficulty on performance. New York: Behavioral Research Service, G. E. Crontonville, 1964.
42.
Susman, G. I.Autonomy at work. New York: Praeger, 1976.
43.
Thompson, J. D.Organization in action. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
44.
Todd, J.Management control systems: A key link between strategy, structure, and employee performance. Organizational Dynamics, 1977, 5 (4), 65-78.
45.
Trist, E. L., & Bamforth, R.Some social and psychological consequences of the long method of goal-setting. Human Relations, 1951, 4, 3-38.
46.
Trist, E. L., Higgin, G. W., Murray, H., & Pollock, A. B.Organizational choice. London: Tavistock, 1963.
47.
Tushman, M. L., & Nadler, D. A.Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Academy of Management Review, 1978, 3, 613-624.
48.
Walton, R. E.The diffusion of new work structures: Explaining why success didn't take. Organizational Dynamics, 1975 (Winter), 3-22.
49.
Walton, R. E.How to counter alienation in the plan. Harvard Business Review, 1972,12 (Nov/Dec), 70-81.
50.
Weick, K. E.The social psychology of organizing. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1969.
51.
Zand, D. E.Collateral organization: A new change strategy. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1974, 10, 63-89.
