Shifting from numerical to narrative-based performance reviews can significantly impact employees’ perceptions of fairness and their likelihood of improving performance based on the feedback, according to Cornell-led research.

Emily Zitek, an associate professor in the ILR School’s Department of Organizational Behavior, is a co-author of “The Power of Words: Employee Responses to Numerical vs. Narrative Performance Feedback,” published Dec. 22 in the Academy of Management Discoveries.

Zitek and co-authors Joonyoung Kim, MILR ’18, Ph.D. ’23, now an assistant professor at the University of Missouri, and Caitlin Stroup ’17 compared responses to performance feedback delivered in one of three formats: numerical-only, narrative-only or a combination of both. Their findings suggest that narrative-only feedback was generally perceived as the fairest, and gives recipients a clearer understanding of how to enhance their future performance, often increasing their motivation to do so.

“When we started this project, we thought that combined feedback might be best,” Zitek said. “But what we ended up finding was that the narrative-only condition was the best in terms of fairness perceptions and preventing people from feeling negatively evaluated.” 

However, the researchers also found that extremely positive feedback, including mentions of monetary bonuses, was well-received regardless of the format.

“It seems like there’s something nice about seeing the high numbers,” Zitek said. “The low numbers hurt, but once they’re seeing high numbers, across the review, they like that a lot better and perceive the review as fair.” 

To examine the impact of various performance feedback formats on employees’ responses, they conducted four experiments in which they manipulated the format of the feedback given to 1,600 participants. Participants received the same evaluations in either numerical-only, narrative-only or a combined format. The researchers then assessed how these formats affected participants’ responses to the feedback.

The researchers concluded that purely numerical feedback without narrative components is not ideal, as even mid-range numerical ratings can make employees feel negatively evaluated, and that the review was unfair. The lack of context also may make it difficult for employees to understand how to improve.

“If someone did only OK, they’re probably going to feel worse about it if they have numbers in their feedback than if they don’t,” Zitek said. “So if you don’t want them to feel bad, give them the information in just a narrative. But that might not be realistic. You might need the numbers to really get across the point that they’re not doing well.”

The authors offer practical implications to organizations by laying out the costs and benefits of removing numbers from performance feedback so that organizations can best decide how to proceed.

“We are hesitant to suggest that employers go to completely narrative-based performance reviews,” Zitek said, “because if you don’t have numbers, there can be some other disadvantages when you are trying to do things like administer bonuses or promotions.”