Feedback: does comparison with the average help people work better?
Dashboards make it easy to give feedback that positions an individual or team against an average. The management question is precise: does this comparison clarify the work expected, or could it replace a quality criterion with other people's behaviour?
What the literature establishes
Leon Festinger (1954, Human Relations) proposes a theory in which individuals evaluate their opinions and abilities by comparing themselves with others, particularly when objective reference points are unavailable. This is a classic theoretical framework, not a trial demonstrating the effectiveness of workplace rankings. For feedback, it suggests distinguishing between two kinds of information: a person's relative position and whether their work meets a requirement.
When the average becomes a target
P. Wesley Schultz, Jessica M. Nolan, Robert B. Cialdini, Noah J. Goldstein and Vladas Griskevicius (2007, Psychological Science) studied feedback on household electricity consumption compared with that of neighbours. Comparative information reduced consumption among households initially above the average, but increased it among those below it. Adding a signal of approval for low consumption prevented this boomerang effect: describing what others do and indicating what is desirable do not necessarily have the same effect.
The premature conclusion
One might conclude that all comparisons should be banned from feedback conversations. These works instead support a precaution: an average should not be allowed to stand in for a professional requirement. A team may outperform the average while still falling short of a quality standard, or depart from it for legitimate reasons related to the difficulty of the situations it handles. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What these findings cannot settle
A study of household consumption does not demonstrate that employee rankings will produce the same reactions. At work, differences in assignments, resources and constraints can make a comparison misleading before feedback is even delivered. These sources therefore establish neither an ideal frequency for rankings nor a guaranteed performance gain from adding a signal of approval.
A practical check in Sion
As part of SHR's « L'art du feedback » programme, an organisation in Sion could examine the feedback materials used over one month in a team working in hydropower, healthcare, viticulture or Alpine tourism. For every comparison with an average or with colleagues, check whether the material states the expected professional criterion and the conditions that make the situations comparable, without replacing safety requirements with a relative norm. The measure would be the proportion of comparative feedback documenting both elements, with anonymised examples retained so that the count can be checked. Repeating this review after revising the materials would show whether they had become more explicit, without confusing that finding with evidence of better work. To go further: explore the The Art of Feedback training in Sion in the canton of Valais, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: The Art of Feedback in Sion
- the art of feedback
- Sion
- research
- training sion