360-Degree Feedback

According to Armstrong and Taylor (2014) this is known as multi-source feedback and 360-degree is assessed and feedback is given by several people who may include their manager, subordinates, colleagues, and customers. The rationale behind this is that different evaluation perspectives offer unique and valuable information that adds enhancement validity to assessing individual performance (Borman, 1997).

As defined by Ward (1997, p.4) 360-degree feedback is the systematic collection and feedback of performance data on an individual or group derived from a number of the stakeholders on their performance. 360-degree feedback is also referred to as multisource assessment or multi-rater feedback. And also, there are several names used to describe 360-degree feedback, those are upward appraisal, co-worker feedback, multi-perspective ratings, and full-circle feedback. Although the names are different, the process is essentially the same (Garavan, Morley and Flynn, 1997). 

Diagram 1.0 - Holistic view of 360 Degree Appraisal

 (Source: Baroda, Sharma and Bhatt, 2012)

According to the 1.0 diagram (Baroda, Sharma and Bhatt, 2012) 360-degree appraisal as it is named, provides feedback from various levels as described above. There this appraisal helps employees to have a holistic view of the impact they have on the Organization due to their performance. Though 360-degree appraisal helps the employees in their career development, it further leads to help the Managers to obtain information on how their leadership style has the rapport and influence among the employees (Baroda, Sharma and Bhatt, 2012). The purpose of the 360-degree appraisal is mainly for Leadership development. This further may tempt Leadership behavioral change for the Managers; since they receive feedback from all corners of the Organization thus ultimately influencing Organizational change and improvements (Baroda, Sharma and Bhatt, 2012).

The rationale for 360-degree feedback:

360-degree activities are usually based on two key assumptions the first one is that awareness of any discrepancy between how we see ourselves and how others see us increases self-awareness, and the second one is that enhanced self-awareness is a key to maximum performance as a leader, and thus becomes a foundation block for management and leadership development programs (Turnow, 1993). Through feedback, recipients receive useful information about their strengths and weaknesses, which can guide their developmental planning (Armstrong, 2009). 360-degree feedback can become a powerful organizational intervention to increase awareness of the importance of aligning leader behavior, work unit results, and customer expectations, as well as increasing employee participation in leadership development and work unit effectiveness (London and Beatty, 1993).

Benefits of 360-degree feedback:

According to the Feedback project (2001) 360-degree feedback is designed, implemented, and conducted professionally, and it can have several beneficial effects. Those are,

• Increased employee self-awareness. 
• Enhanced understanding of behaviors needed to increase individual and organizational performance.
• The creation of development activities that are more specific to the employee.
• Increased involvement of employees at all levels in the hierarchy.
• Increased devolution of self-development and learning to employees.

360-degree feedback: Methodology

Questionnaire:  According to Armstrong (2000, p.119) 360-degree feedback processes usually obtain data from questionnaires that measure from different perspectives the behaviors of individuals against a list of competencies. A typical questionnaire may cover aspects of performance such as leadership, teamwork, communication, organizational skills, decisiveness, drive, and adaptability.

Ratings:  According to Armstrong (2009, p.114) ratings are given by the generators of the feedback on a scale against each heading. This may refer both to importance and performance, rating the importance of each item on a scale of 1 (not important) to 6 (essential), and performance on a scale of 1 (weak in this area) to 6 (outstanding).

Data processing: The questionnaire is usually prepared with the help of software developed within the organization or, more often provided by external suppliers. This allows data collection and analysis to be completed quickly with minimal effort and in a way that facilitates graphical as wee as a numerical presentation (Armstrong, 2009).

Feedback: Feedback is often anonymous and can be submitted to the individual (most commonly), the individual’s manager (less common), or the individual and the manager (Armstrong, 2009).

Action: The action generated by the feedback will depend on the purposes of the process. That is development, appraisal, or pay (Armstrong, 2009).

Advantages and Disadvantages 360-degree feedback:

According to Armstrong (2009) the following advantages and disadvantages can be seen.

Advantages:

• individuals get a broader perspective of how they are perceived by others than previously possible.
• It gives people a more rounded view of their performance.
• Increased awareness of and relevance of competencies.
• Increased awareness by Senior Management that they too have development needs.
• Feedback is perceived as more valid and objective, leading to acceptance of results and action required.

Disadvantages:

• People do not always give frank or honest feedback.
• People may be put under stress in receiving or giving feedback.
• Lack of action following feedback.
• Over-reliance on technology.
• Too much bureaucracy.
• Can be time-consuming and resource-intensive.

Conclusion:

The use of 360-degree feedback can be effective in promoting self-awareness in a team environment and enhancing trust, sharing, and communication transparency through greater clarity on desired goals and behaviors. Implementing a formal 360-degree feedback process should not be taken lightly.

References:

Armstrong, M. (2000) Performance management: Key Strategies and Practical Guidelines, 2^nd edn. London: Kogan Page Limited.

Armstrong, M. (2009) Armstrong's handbook of performance management: An evidence-based guide to delivering high performance, 4^th edn. London: Kogan Page Publishers.

Armstrong, M. and Taylor, S. (2014) Armstrong's Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, 13^th edn. London: Kogan Page Publishers.

Baroda, S., Sharma, C. and Bhatt, J.K. (2012) 360 Degree Feedback Appraisals-An innovative approach of Performance Management System. International Journal of Management & Information Technology, 1(2), pp.53-66.

Borman, W. C. (1997) 360 ratings: An analysis of assumptions and a research agenda for evaluating their validity. Human Resource Management Review, 7(3), 299-315.

Feedback Project. (2001) 360-Degree Feedback: Best practice guidelines, University of Surrey, Roehampton.

Garavan, T.N. Morley, M. and Flynn, M. (1997), "360-degree feedback: its role in employee development", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 134-147.

London, M, and Beatty, R. W. (1993) 360-degree feedback as a competitive advantage, Human Resource Management, 32 (2/3), pp 353–372.

Turnow, W. W. (1993) Introduction to special issue on 360-degree feedback, Human Resource Management, Summer-Fall, pp. 311-316.

Ward, P. (1997) 360-Degree Feedback, Institute of Personnel and Development, London.