Home -> Management Resources -> HR Articles ->Are you ready for 360?
Are You Ready for 360?Genene Koebelin Human Performance Improvement Spring, 1999 Suffolk University This article is copyright Genene Koebelin."There is a degree of readiness for 360-feedback programs. Organizations need to gauge how ready they are for 360. Because 360 is a powerful diagnostic/assessment process, it can be used in many areas of human resource development and personnel management. It will raise questions about how the system will be used and how it will affect people. Although 360 can benefit all employees, most organizations don't make it available to everyone right away. They start with small groups to become practiced at implementation and to learn how to get the most value from the experience" (Tom Sullivan, M.P.A., Performance Management Listserve, February 12, 1999). Is Your Organization Ready for 360 Degree Feedback? The question of whether or not your organization is ready for 360 degree feedback is not a simple "yes" or "no" question as it may appear. Thats because 360 degree feedback is not a thing that can be packaged and delivered, nor is it a program that can be implemented on a certain date in time. 360 degree feedback is a process that involves identification of a "problem" to be solved, analysis of the context and current atmosphere for problem resolution, commitment of resources (both monetary and time), and a detailed plan for implementation and follow-up.
What is 360 Degree Feedback? "The (360 degree) feedback process...involves collecting perceptions about a persons behavior and the impact of that behavior from the persons boss or bosses, direct reports, colleagues, fellow members of project teams, internal and external customers, and suppliers. Other names for 360 degree feedback are multi-rater feedback, multi-source feedback, full-circle appraisal, and group performance review" (Lepsinger, 1997, p. 6). In order for an organization to be ready for effective 360 degree feedback, a number of questions need to be answered. The effectiveness of the feedback is directly linked to the integrity of the process, and the integrity of the process is measured in terms of commitment, clarity of purpose, and follow-up. A 360 degree feedback team is recommended for accomplishing a detailed plan to address these issues prior to implementation. The Balanced Scorecard Utilizing the four perspectives of the balanced scorecard as a framework for examining organizational readiness, the team would involve themselves in creating a plan which addresses the following: I. Internal Business Process
Perspective I. Internal Business
Process Perspective While 25% of the respondents indicated that they use 360 degree feedback for performance appraisal, there are strong arguments against its use for that purpose, and nearly unanimous agreement that 360 degree feedback should not be used for appraisal purposes in a company that is not experienced in the 360 degree feedback process. Instead, it should be used to link employee development with organizational development in a way that clearly supports a strategy or goal. The experts have seen 360
degree feedback used in a number of ways, including Should You Consider 360 Degree Feedback for Your Organization? "To decide whether
360 degree feedback could be useful in your organization, ask yourself the following
questions: The Wrong Motives for Considering 360 Degree Feedback "Once you roll this out,
youre asking people to be as honest as they possibly can in giving feedback to their
peers. If they believe its going to be used as a downsizing tool or for
compensation, you take away the systems integrity...On the other hand, if you use it
for professional development, youre making a personal and professional investment in
your employees" (Brotherton, p. 2). 360 degree feedback should not be considered as a way for
gathering documentation against a single problem employee. Face-to-face discussion with
the supervisor is more appropriate for handling individual employee problems. "If you
start, for example, to collect information without involvement of the employee (e.g. talk to coworkers or other staff) you
set up a situation for incredible anger and confrontation" (Robert Bacal, Performance
Management Listserve, February 11, 1999). "I'll strongly agree with Robert Bacal's
comments about the dangers of using 360-feedback as a means to support someone's
termination or promotion. While I am a strong advocate of 360-feedback as an individualized or team development process, I would question
its utility in this case" (Tom Sullivan, Performance Management Listserve, February
11, 1999). "Also, even if the employee IS involved in the 360 process, there could be
a risk to the 'boss.' He or she couldn't come out of this 'smelling' too good, independent
of the outcome" (Douglas M. Max, Performance Management Listserve, February 11,
1999). Just as 360 degree feedback should not be used on one poorly
functioning employee alone, it will not by itself solve all of the problems of a poorly
functioning organization. "360 degree feedback wont fix a system that
doesnt work" (Lepsinger, 1998, p. 5). "Professionally developed assessment
tools identify skills sets or competencies required for success in a specific role. If the
culture fails to reinforce the objectives of the assessment tools (such as planning or
staff development), the exercise of receiving 360 degree feedback will be academic, at
best--and frustrating and demoralizing, at worst" (Haworth, p. 5). "360 needs to be instituted as a tool to help, not a
weapon. In those instances where it is eventually used in performance appraisal (a
practice I have reservations about) it is first used as a developmental tool for several years, if the practice is to be
effective" (Judy Cox, Performance Management Listserve, March 19, 1999). It is
essential that the feedback be seen as only one component of the appraisal, not the entire
basis for evaluation. "Feedback is most effective in performance appraisal when it is
used for goal-setting" (Lepsinger, 1998, p. 4) "Another factor in 360 readiness is whether those who
will be rated see the process as constructive, not attacking--that is, is the organization
using the 360 process to help people improve (or, in some cases, choose to play a
different role in the organization) or is it using the process to justify removing people
or otherwise making punitive actions?" (Judy Cox, Performance Management Listserve,
March 19, 1999). .360 Degree Feedback Does
Not Equal Perfect or Objective Feedback A number of sources state that 360 degree feedback is more objective
than feedback from ones superior alone, as in the traditional annual performance
review, but claims regarding objectivity are not strictly accurate. "If the objective
behind this is to ensure objectivity and accuracy of assessments, you should realize that
these systems do not provide that benefit. They increase the amount of feedback, but the
feedback is still subjective." (Brock Vodden, Performance Management Listserve,
February 26, 1999). At the same time, though, we realize that having a number of people
agree in their opinions is more powerful than one persons opinion alone. When people
share the same opinion, then we conclude that we are probably that much closer to the
truth--while at the same time acknowledging that truth is, at least in part, dependent
upon perspective. Are Open Communication and Employee Empowerment
Desired Values in Your Organization? "A bureaucratic system of controls relies on a
formal structure and rules that define appropriate behavior and performance; formalization
is maximized. It is a system in which responsibility is vested in the chain of command. It
is probably the organizational control system least conducive to 360 degree
feedback...When choosing a feedback system such as 360 degree feedback, there must be
"philosophic consistency" between the feedback system chosen and the
organizations traditional approach or the internal contradictions will disrupt the
process of change" Jackson, p. 7). In assessing readiness for 360 degree feedback, it is
important to consider whether open communication and employee empowerment are desired
values in the organization. The assessment process alone is an empowering process,
especially if it includes the recommended team planning. "Feedback and communication
between managers and supervisors is very important when it is open, clear, and based on
mutual respect. Performance Management systems (the good ones) provide for these functions. They also involve effective, collaborative
objective-setting, planning of the work, continuous review of the work, and mutual
identification of ways to improve the performance" (Brock Vodden, Performance
Management Listserve, February 26, 1999). Communication is critical to the success of the 360 degree
feedback process. Managers and participants need to be educated and involved from the
beginning regarding the purpose and goals of the process. From the beginning, the 360
degree feedback team should make communication a key element of their task in planning the
360 degree feedback process. Top Management Should Lead
the Way Marion Jacobson, Vice President and Director of Corporate Training at Paine Webber, explains why Paine Webber decided to have top management be the first participants in the 360 degree feedback process. "We chose that route because we wanted to show people at other levels that they were part of senior managements development and also to provide them with a model for being open. When they saw that top-level executives were willing to open up to what people were saying about them, and to the fact that they needed to develop their skills, it created more willingness on the part of less senior people to undergo the process later on" (Lepsinger, 1997, p. 18). What is HRs role? HRs vision for the process can lead the way to achieving needed organizational change. "HR is shaped by the business goals, the corporate culture, the competitive position, and the workforce demographics of each organization it serves...In the 90s, HR has grappled with many key business challenges: aligning HR practices with business goals, using HR practices to better connect with a customer base, establishing effective partnerships while maintaining a distinct corporate culture" (Halcrow, p. 2). HR should strive to create
and communicate a shared vision of the goals of the 360 degree feedback process, and
should support the process with its technical expertise and resources. In addition, HR
will play a key role in developing organization-wide development plans based on the
training and other identified needs of employees. The plan may well include HRs
playing a role in monitoring and tracking a number of follow-up activities, as well as
measuring and reporting progress or improvements in achieving the companys overall
goal or strategy. II. Financial
Perspective Secondly, questionnaires may need to be sent to an outside agency to insure the confidentiality of the process, although this would be an additional expense. Outside agencies can also aggregate the data and compile individual and organization-wide reports while insuring the confidentiality of all participants. Finally, the 360 degree feedback process is used to identify employee skill gaps and development needs and to prepare individual and organization-wide development plans. In an atmosphere of trust, where people truly believe that the data will not be held against them but will rather be used to help them, they will naturally expect feedback on their improvement. This means that they will expect not only follow-up training and assistance, but future feedback on their performance. "Despite their growing
popularity, many multi-rater efforts are falling woefully short of their potential. Most
companies view the multi-rater process as a special event, using it one time only as part
of a training or coaching session. As a result, they dont take the process beyond
the initial goal of providing feedback to individual employees" (Gebelein, p. 1). 360
degree feedback is not a one time only process--employees will expect and deserve a second
round. III. Customer
Perspective 360 degree feedback can be
used to support a corporate strategy of shifting the focus of the company from meeting the
internal needs of the department or functional unit to meeting the needs of the customer.
In this way, customer involvement can be used to enhance strategic alignment and
facilitate to-to-bottom focus (i.e., aligning goals from the organizational to the
individual level (Karl, p. 1). To accomplish this, the 360
degree feedback team had to take on the task of restructuring the entire bank so that
employees would become "generalists" with broad expertise as opposed to experts
in one specific area only. In partnership with experts on 360 degree feedback, the team
designed a process to: IV. Learning Perspective
"Including employees from multiple layers in the feedback process is concrete evidence that their opinions, observations and evaluations are valued by the organization. Creating an atmosphere that accents involvement can foster voluntary collaboration, an element sometimes sacrificed in traditional, striated cultures" (Hoffman, p. 2). Successful implementation of a 360 degree feedback process depends on whether it truly addresses, and is perceived to address, an important performance strategy or goal in the company. In addition to the benefits of exchanging feedback, its also a way to get people accustomed to living in a feedback-rich environment. When done well, 360 degree feedback systems can lead to positive change and enhanced effectiveness at the individual, team, and organizational levels Wimer, p. 2).
BIBLIOGRAPHY Atwater, Leanne, and David Waldman. "Accountability in 360 degree feedback." HR Magazine. May 1998: v43 n6 p96(6). Brajkovich, Leo F. "How truthful should you be when evaluating your boss?" The Academy of Management Executive. November, 1995: v9 n4 p89(2). Brotherton, Phaedra. "Candid feedback spurs change in culture." HR Magazine. May, 1996: v41 n5 p47(5). Church, Allan H. "First-rate multi-rater feedback." Training and Development. August, 1995: v49 n8 p42(3). Coates, Dennis E. "Dont tie 360 feedback to pay." Training. September, 1998: v35 n9 p68(7). Fried, N. Elizabeth. "360 degrees software shootout: compairing features with needs." HR Magazine. December, 1998: v43 I13 pS8(6). Gebelein, Susan H. "Employee development: multi-rater feedback goes strategic." HR Focus. January, 1996: v73 n1 p1(4). Halcrow, Allan. "Wow! Look what HR can do!" Workforce. Costa Mesa, March, 1999. Haworth, Susan. "The dark side of multi-rater assessments." HR Magazine. May, 1998: v43 n6 p106(6). Hoffman, Robert. "Ten reasons you should be using 360-degree feedback" HR Magazine. April, 1995: v40 n4 p82(4). Jackson, John H. and Martin M. Greller. "Decision elements for using 360 degree feedback." Human Resource Planning. December, 1998: v21 I4 p18(1). Lepsinger, Richard and Anntoinette D. Lucia. The Art and Science of 360 Degree Feedback. Pfeiffer/ Jossey-Bass Inc., San Francisco, 1997. Lepsinger, Richard and Antoinette D. Lucia. "Creating champions for 360 degree feedback." Training and Development. February, 1998: v52 n2 p49(4). OReilly, Brian. "360-degree feedback can change you life" Fortune. October 17, 1994: v130 n8 p93(4). Romano, Catherine. "Conquering the fear of feedback." HR Focus. March, 1994: v71 n3 p9(2). Waldman, David A., Leanne E. Atwater, and David Antonioni. "Has 360 degree feedback gone amok?" The Academy of Management Executive. May, 1998: v12 n2 p86(9). Wimer, Scott, and Kenneth M. Nowack. "13 common mistakes using 360-degree feedback." Training & Development. May, 1998: v52 n5 p69(10).
|
Home -> Management Resources -> HR Articles ->Are you ready for 360?