Peer Pressure
The article written by Loughry and Tosi was based on a deductive theory. They focused their research on how effective can an organization be where feedbacks from peers acting as agents could influence their co-workers performance and behavior in an informally controlled management. Thus, trying to understand the effectiveness of monitoring, work-unit performance and an individual’s satisfaction in performing well for a reward system in an organization. Highlighting the two research question “What is peer monitoring “and “Is peer monitoring associated with higher work-unit performance?” The authors examined two types of peer monitoring direct (where the workers performance gets noticed by it peers) and indirect (when a worker performs poorly and becomes the topic of gossip amongst its peers) from a sample size of 67 theme parks, where three moderators were considered supervisory monitoring, task interdependence and cohesiveness in order to understand if peer monitoring can encourage better performance. Supervisory monitoring submits when workers are closely supervised under a watchful eye of the supervisor, resulting in either a reward or punishment based on the performance. Task interdependence refer to the extent to which an individual need to rely on the information, materials and support provided by other group members to complete his or her tasks (Chen, Tang, and Wang cited in Brass, 1981; Vender vegt et al.,2001). Lastly, Cohesiveness where group member share commitments with group task. (Hausknecht, trevor & Howard, 2009 cited in Goodman, Ravlin & Schminke, 1987; Gross & Martin, 1952) and shared structure and mutual liking for one another (Hausknecht, trevor & Howard, 2009 cited in Evans & Jarvis, 1980) To identify better with peer monitoring, Loughry and Tosi used the quantative method. Firstly, they conducted an empirical research, by gathering qualitative information on a purposive sampling from selected departments to find out if the employees