This study investigated how perceptions of supervisor communication competence and source credibility were affected by the valence and synchronicity of a feedback message and the channel used to deliver the feedback message. Results indicated that those receiving feedback preferred phone calls rather than text messages as a channel for managers to deliver feedback. Also, supervisors delivering positive feedback were identified as more positive in general than those delivering negative feedback. Further results and implications are discussed.
AdamsS. M. (2005). Positive affect and feedback-giving behavior. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20, 24-42. doi:10.1108/02683940510571621
2.
ArgyrisC. (1991, May/June). Teaching smart people how to learn. Harvard Business Review, 99-109.
3.
BondC. F.AndersonE. L. (1987). The reluctance to transmit bad news: Private discomfort or public display?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 176-187. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(87)90030-8
4.
CanaryD. J.CupachW. R.SerpeR. T. (2001). A competence-based approach to examining interpersonal conflict test of a longitudinal model. Communication Research, 28, 79-104. doi:10.1177/009365001028001003
5.
CanaryD. J.SpitzbergB. H. (1987). Appropriateness and effectiveness perceptions of conflict strategies. Human Communication Research, 14, 93-118. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1987.tb00123.x
6.
CarsonC. L.CupachW. R. (2000). Facing corrections in the workplace: The influence of perceived face threat on the consequences of managerial reproaches. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 28, 215-234. doi:10.1080/00909880009365572
7.
ColeJ. G.McCroskeyJ. C. (2003). The association of perceived communication apprehension, shyness, and verbal aggression with perceptions of source credibility and affect in organizational and interpersonal contexts. Communication Quarterly, 51, 101-110.
8.
CoxS. S.MarlerL. E.SimmeringM. J.TottenJ. W. (2011). Giving feedback: Development of scales for the mum effect, discomfort giving feedback, and feedback medium preference. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 23(4), 49-69. doi:10.1002/piq.20094
9.
DaftR. L.LengelR. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 191-233.
10.
DaricsE. (2014). The blurring boundaries between synchronicity and asynchronicity: New communicative situations in work-related instant messaging. International Journal of Business Communication, 51, 337-358. doi:10.1177/2329488414525440
11.
ElangovanA. R.XieJ. L. (2000). Effects of perceived power of supervisor on subordinate work attitudes. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21, 319-328. doi:10.1108/01437730010343095
12.
FalcioneR. L. (1974). Credibility: Qualifier of subordinate participation. Journal of Business Communication, 11(3), 43-54.
13.
FalcioneR. L. (1976). Behavioral components of perceived supervisor credibility. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 4, 55-64.
14.
FarrJ. L. (1993). Informal performance feedback: Seeking and giving. In SchulerH.FarrJ. L.SmithM. (Eds.), Personnel selection and assessment: Individual and organizational perspectives (pp. 163-180). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15.
GoldenT. D. (2009). Applying technology to work: Toward a better understanding of telework. Organization Management Journal, 6, 241-250. doi:10.1057/omj.2009.33
16.
GordonM. E.MillerV. (2011). Conversations about job performance: A communication perspective on the appraisal process. New York, NY: Business Expert Press. doi:10.4128/9781606490754
17.
GraenG. B.Uhl-BienM. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219-247. doi:10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5
18.
HarrisK. J.KacmarK. M.ZivnuskaS.ShawJ. D. (2007). The impact of political skill on impression management effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 278-285. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.278
19.
HattieJ.TimperleyH. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487
20.
HigginsC. A.JudgeT. A. (2004). The effect of applicant influence tactics on recruiter perceptions of fit and hiring recommendations: A field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 622-632. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.4.622
21.
JacobsM.JacobsA.FeldmanG.CaviorN. (1973). Feedback II—The “credibility gap”: Delivery of positive and negative and emotional and behavioral feedback in groups. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41, 215-222.
22.
KacmarM. K.WayneS. J.WrightP. (1996). Subordinate reactions to the use of impression management tactics and feedback by the supervisor. Journal of Managerial Issues, 8, 35-54.
23.
Kristof-BrownA.BarrickM. R.FrankeM. (2002). Applicant impression management: Dispositional influences and consequences for recruiter perceptions of fit and similarity. Journal of Management, 28, 27-46.
24.
KurtzbergT. R.BelkinL. Y.NaquinC. E. (2006). The effect of e-mail on attitudes towards performance feedback. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 14(1), 4-21. doi:10.1108/10553180610739722
25.
KurtzbergT. R.NaquinC. E.BelkinL. Y. (2005). Electronic performance appraisals: The effects of e-mail communication on peer ratings in actual and simulated environments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98, 216-226. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.07.001
26.
LamC. F.DeRueD. S.KaramE. P.HollenbeckJ. R. (2011). The impact of feedback frequency on learning and task performance: Challenging the “more is better” assumption. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116, 217-228. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.05.002
27.
MadlockP. E. (2008). The link between leadership style, communicator competence, and employee satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication, 45, 61-78. doi:10.1177/0021943607309351
28.
McCroskeyJ. C.TevenJ. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66, 90-103. doi:10.1080/03637759909376464
29.
MorandD. A. (2000). Language and power: An empirical analysis of linguistic strategies used in superior-subordinate communication. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 235-248.
30.
MossS. E.SanchezJ. I.BrumbaughA. M.BorkowskiN. (2009). The mediating role of feedback avoidance behavior in the LMX—Performance relationship. Group & Organization Management, 34, 645-664. doi:10.1177/1059601109350986
31.
MossS. E.ValenziE. R.TaggartW. (2003). Are you hiding from your boss? The development of a taxonomy and instrument to assess the feedback management behaviors of good and bad performers. Journal of Management, 29, 487-510.
32.
O’SullivanP. B. (2000). What you don’t know won’t hurt me: Impression management functions of communication channels in relationships. Human Communication Research, 26, 403-431. doi:10.1093/hcr/26.3.403
33.
O’SullivanP. B. (2004, July). Channel as metacommunication: Message of the medium. Paper presented at the International Conference on Language and Social Psychology, State College, PA.
34.
PapousekI.PaechterM.LacknerH. K. (2011). Delayed psychophysiological recovery after self-concept-inconsistent negative performance feedback. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 82, 275-282. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.09.013
35.
PerloffR. M. (2003). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the 21st century (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
36.
PodsakoffP. M.SchriescheimC. A. (1985). Field studies of French and Raven’s bases of power: Critique, reanalysis, and suggestions for future research. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 387-411. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.97.3.387
37.
RogersE. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York, NY: Free Press.
38.
RogersE. M.Agarwala-RogersR. (1976). Communication in organizations. New York, NY: Free Press.
39.
SheerV. C. (2012). Does e-mail facilitate negative performance feedback giving? Supervisor and subordinate responses compared via the concept of social accountability. Communication Studies, 63, 220-242. doi:10.1080/10510974.2011.633150
40.
SheerV. C.ChenL. (2004). Improving media richness theory: A study of interaction goals, message valence, and task complexity in manager-subordinate communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 11, 76-93. doi:10.1177/0893318904265803
41.
SteelmanL. A.LevyP. E.SnellA. F. (2004). The feedback environment scale: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 165-184.
42.
SteelmanL. A.RutkowskiK. A. (2004). Moderators of employee reactions to negative feedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19, 6-18.
43.
SussmanS.SproullL. (1999). Straight talk: Delivering bad news through electronic communication. Information Systems Research, 10, 150-166. doi:10.1287/isre.10.2.150
44.
TimmermanP. D.HarrisonW. (2005). The discretionary use of electronic media: Four considerations for bad news bearers. Journal of Business Communication, 42, 379-389. doi:10.1177/0021943605279059
45.
WaltherJ. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43. doi:10.1177/009365096023001001
46.
WaltherJ. B.RamirezA.Jr. (2010). New technologies and new directions in online relating. In SmithS.WilsonS. (Eds.), New directions in interpersonal communication research (pp. 264-284). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47.
WayneS. J.KacmarK. M. (1991). The effects of impression management on the performance appraisal process. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 48, 70-88.
48.
WayneS. J.LidenR. C. (1995). Effects of impression management on performance ratings: A longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 232-260.
49.
WestermanC. Y. K.WestermanD. (2010). Supervisor impression management: Message content and channel effects on impressions. Communication Studies, 61, 585-601.
50.
YuklG.FalbeC. M. (1991). Importance of different power sources in downward and lateral relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 416-423.
