Getting 360 Degree Feedback Right

GETTING 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK RIGHT By Maury A. Peiperl Presented by: Lawi Anupam 1224108221 GITAM Institute of International Business

360 DEGREE FEEDBACK 

An assessment process used to improve managerial effectiveness by providing the manager with a more complete assessment of their effectiveness, and their performance and development needs.



The process of getting feedback from multiple sources. (peers, subordinates, customers, supervisors)



Also called as “Peer Appraisal”.

or Co (In te -w ter am ork na m er l c em s us be to rs m er )

(In Su t e bo rn rd a l in cu at e st o s m er )

(In t

Ma ern nag al c er ust om er)

nt me s art ep tive r) r D enta ome he t Ot pres cus Re nal ter (In

Top Management (Internal customer)

PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING 360 DEGREE APPRAISAL  Develop questionnaire  Ensure confidentiality  Provide training / orientation  Administer the feedback  Analyze the data  Develop and distribute results

PROS OF 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK 

The system is more comprehensive in that responses are gathered from multiple perspectives.



Quality of information is better.



It may lessen bias/prejudice since feedback comes from more people, not one individual.



Feedback from peers and others may increase employee selfdevelopment.



Helps in identification of strength and weakness of employees.

CONS OF 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK 

The system is complex in combining all the responses.



Feedback may not be fair.



There may be conflicting opinions, though they may all be accurate from the respective standpoints.



Employees may collude or “game” the system by giving invalid evaluations to one another.



Consumes enormous time and very costly.



Difficult for cross-cultural organizations.



Maintaining confidentiality is difficult.

MANAGING “PEER” IN PEER APPRAISAL 

Go public with your support



Be a counselor and role model



Provide training early and often



Put substance before rankings



Let people know when they are not doing peer appraisal well

PARADOX OF ROLES YOU CANNOT BE BOTH A PEER AND A JUDGE

Disadvantages 

Give fairly conservative feedback



Feedback may be distorted, overly positive unhelpful to managers and recipients.



Negative feedback may damage relationship.



Hurt own careers and those of friends and colleagues.

PARADOX OF GROUP PERFORMANCE FOCUSING ON INDIVIDUALS PUTS THE ENTIRE GROUP AT RISK Disadvantages 

Ignores group dynamics and work realities.



May harm close-knit and successful groups.



Low performing groups believe it as a veiled attempt to assess blame.



Can breed cynicism, suspicion and an “us-against them” mentality.

MEASUREMENT PARADOX THE EASIER FEEDBACK IS TO GATHER, THE HARDER IT IS TO APPLY Advantages 

Give qualitative comments and insights to the employee.

Disadvantages  

  

Process required excessive amount of paperwork. System lack a mechanism for giving or setting detailed feedback beyond a letter. Time consuming. Not easily compared and aggregated. Qualitative feedback is more difficult.

PARADOX OF REWARDS WHEN PEER APPRAISAL COUNTS THE MOST, IT HELPS THE LEAST Disadvantages 

People focus virtually all their attention on reward outcomes.



Threat to feelings of self-worth.



Affect salary reviews and promotions

MANAGING THROUGH PARADOXES 

To provide timely and useful feedback to improve the performance of the individual.



Employee receives detailed and qualitative feedback.



This is accompanied by coaching and counseling.



To check that the things are going smoothly and to head off major conflicts.



Improve ties between groups.



Aimed at distributing authority and responsibility more broadly throughout an organization.

THANK YOU