The purpose of this study was to identify similarities and differences among superiors and subordinates about the perceived quality and quantity of feedback superiors were giving subordinates in a public health organization. The research compared the perceived quality and quantity of feedback superiors were giving subordinates regarding their job performance. The analysis was then taken a step further to determine the relationship between subordinates' perceptions of the quality and quantity of the feedback they received and their job satisfaction.The members of two departments in the public health organization were chosen to complete a questionnaire. Results of the questionnaire revealed that, in general, these superiors and subordinates shared similar perceptions of the feedback superiors provided subordinates. There was a significant difference in the perceptions of the amount of feedback provided, however. Similarly, superiors perceived that frequency, timing, consistency of feedback affected subordinates' job satisfaction more than the quality or amount. Subordinates, on the other hand, perceived that the quality and amount of feedback affected their job satisfaction more than the frequency, consistency, and timing of feedback. Respondents differed in their perceptions of channels through which subordinates preferred to receive feedback. The majority of subordinates responded that they preferred receiving feedback by face-to-face communication, while their superiors thought that they preferred receiving it through a combination of channels, such as face-to-face, telephone, a written note, or memo. Respondents also differed in their perceptions of positive and negative feedback. Superiors perceived they were giving more negative feedback than subordinates perceived they were receiving.
Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/183361 |
Date | January 1987 |
Creators | Croasdell, Lora L. |
Contributors | Nitcavic, Richard G. |
Source Sets | Ball State University |
Detected Language | English |
Format | 66, [17] leaves ; 28 cm. |
Source | Virtual Press |
Page generated in 0.0123 seconds