Performance Feedback Persistence: Comparative Effects of Historical Versus Peer Performance Feedback on Innovative Search

Abstract

Firms use aspirations to regulate innovative search activities, but peer and historical referents may contain different signals regarding performance feedback. Integrating insights from the literature on profit persistence with the behavioral theory of the firm, we propose a persistence-based framework of organizational innovative search that connects the persistence characteristics of feedback from peer and historical referents with innovative search. We first predict that feedback from peer referents is more persistent than feedback from historical referents. Further, we theorize that peer performance feedback produces more pronounced effects: Performance above (below) peer aspiration leads to less (more) innovative search compared with performance above (below) the historical aspiration level. In addition, because industries impose heterogeneous levels of profit persistence, the differential effect between peer and historical performance feedback on innovative search is likely to be more evident in highly persistent industries. Examining the research-and-development intensity of a comprehensive panel of Compustat manufacturing firms over the past 45 years, our results from quasi–maximum likelihood analysis and fixed-effect panel regression largely support our theoretical development. Our study extends a nascent understanding of aspiration heterogeneity by revealing and empirically confirming the critical role of persistence.