IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/iubhbm/304403.html

Mistakes at work are judged more negatively in routine tasks than in complex tasks

Author

Listed:
  • Hampel, Tim

Abstract

Mistakes at work can lead to learning and personal development or can massively harm one's professional career. How a mistake affects a professional career often depends on how it is perceived by involved individuals (e.g. supervisors). In the present study we investigate two different types of mistakes at work: mistakes in routine and complex work tasks. In two experiments with 192 alumni of a German university we tested whether mistakes in routine tasks are judged differently than mistakes in complex work tasks. Results revealed that mistakes are judged significantly more negative when occurring in a routine work task compared to a complex work task. The results of our study give rise to a dilemma of mistakes at work where on basis of dual process theories mistakes are more likely to happen in routinized tasks while at the same time these mistakes are judged more negatively. We discuss an intervention to resolve the dilemma and suggest avenues for future research alongside the limitations of our study.

Suggested Citation

  • Hampel, Tim, 2024. "Mistakes at work are judged more negatively in routine tasks than in complex tasks," IU Discussion Papers - Business & Management 12 (Oktober 2024), IU International University of Applied Sciences.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:iubhbm:304403
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/304403/1/1906018839.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fleur Deken & Paul R. Carlile & Hans Berends & Kristina Lauche, 2016. "Generating Novelty Through Interdependent Routines: A Process Model of Routine Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 659-677, June.
    2. Dean Tjosvold & Zi‐you Yu & Chun Hui, 2004. "Team Learning from Mistakes: The Contribution of Cooperative Goals and Problem‐Solving," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(7), pages 1223-1245, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Niki A. den Nieuwenboer & João Vieira da Cunha & Linda Klebe Treviño, 2017. "Middle Managers and Corruptive Routine Translation: The Social Production of Deceptive Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 781-803, October.
    2. Xiangming (Tommy) Tao & Catherine L. Wang & Paul J. A. Robson & Mathew (Mat) Hughes, 2025. "How does team learning from failure facilitate new product performance? The double-edged moderating effect of collective efficacy," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 64(1), pages 133-155, January.
    3. Chu, Wenyi & Baxter, David & Liu, Yang, 2025. "Exploring the impacts of generative AI on artistic innovation routines," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    4. Sushil & Kamala Kannan Dinesh, 2022. "Structured Literature Review with TISM Leading to an Argumentation Based Conceptual Model," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 23(3), pages 387-407, September.
    5. Anja Danner-Schröder, 2021. "Without actors, there is no action: How interpersonal interactions help to explain routine dynamics," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 1913-1936, October.
    6. Yueqiao Qiao & Zhe Zhang & Ming Jia, 2021. "Their Pain, Our Pleasure: How and When Peer Abusive Supervision Leads to Third Parties’ Schadenfreude and Work Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(4), pages 695-711, April.
    7. Seyb, Stella K. & Shepherd, Dean A. & Williams, Trenton A., 2019. "Exoskeletons, entrepreneurs, and communities: A model of co-constructing a potential opportunity," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(6).
    8. Gressgård, Leif Jarle & Hansen, Kåre, 2015. "Knowledge exchange and learning from failures in distributed environments: The role of contractor relationship management and work characteristics," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 167-175.
    9. Mingze Li & Shuting Peng & Liwen Liu, 2022. "How Do Team Cooperative Goals Influence Thriving at Work: The Mediating Role of Team Time Consensus," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-12, April.
    10. Wu, Long-Zeng & Ferris, D. Lance & Kwan, Ho Kwong & Chiang, Flora & Snape, Ed & Liang, Lindie H., 2015. "Breaking (or making) the silence: How goal interdependence and social skill predict being ostracized," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 51-66.
    11. Liu, Xing & Kassa, Abere & Tekleab, Amanuel G., 2025. "Are intrateam trust and organizational trust substitutable? Effects on team reflexivity, engagement and performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    12. Martha S. Feldman & Brian T. Pentland & Luciana D’Adderio & Nathalie Lazaric, 2016. "Beyond Routines as Things: Introduction to the Special Issue on Routine Dynamics," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 505-513, June.
    13. Daniela Andreini & Cristina Bettinelli & Nicolai J. Foss & Marco Mismetti, 2022. "Business model innovation: a review of the process-based literature," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 26(4), pages 1089-1121, December.
    14. Sutopo Sutopo & Bayu Rahmat Setiadi & Muhammad Nurtanto & Sigit Purnomo & Nurcholish Arifin Handoyono & Arif Bintoro Johan, 2020. "Enhancing of Student Collaboration in Thinking, Pairing, and Sharing on Energy Conversion Learning," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 9(4), pages 199-199, August.
    15. Sithipolvanichgul, Juthamon & Dhir, Amandeep & Talwar, Shalini & Kaur, Puneet, 2025. "Decomposition of double-loop failure risk in post-innovation failure phase," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    16. Pathak, Seemantini & Chiu, Shih-Chi (Sana), 2020. "Firm-advisor ties and financial performance in the context of corporate divestiture," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 315-328.
    17. Haridimos Tsoukas, 2017. "Don't Simplify, Complexify: From Disjunctive to Conjunctive Theorizing in Organization and Management Studies," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 132-153, March.
    18. Ben Lupton & Richard Warren, 2018. "Managing Without Blame? Insights from the Philosophy of Blame," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(1), pages 41-52, September.
    19. Dean A. Shepherd & Holger Patzelt & Trenton A. Williams & Dennis Warnecke, 2014. "How Does Project Termination Impact Project Team Members? Rapid Termination, ‘Creeping Death’, and Learning from Failure," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(4), pages 513-546, June.
    20. Megan S. Jones & Amanda E. Cravens & Jill Zarestky & Courtney Ngai & Hannah B. Love, 2024. "Facilitating psychological safety in science and research teams," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • M - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:iubhbm:304403. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.iu.de/forschung/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.