Management Consulting | Communications | Web hosting & E-mail solutions

First written on September 10, 2000 Revised and Updated on October 06, 2008 360 Degree Feedback Strategies for Effective Workforce Communication Preamble: In early June 2000, one of our readers Mr. Mark Forquer then working in the US Army as Master Sergeant approached me on the importance of 360 degree feed back as he was preparing for his paper on the above subject. I had provided whatever little information and comments to him and he sent me the article titled as above on completion. I am happy to reproduce the same verbatim for our readers. My Comments are given at the end of the page. Quote Author: Mr. Mark Forquer "Effective communication in today's workforce is essential. A good facilitator or administrator recognizes and appreciates the sensitive nature surrounding feedback and takes serious steps to ensure the integrity of the process and support of the individual. This paper will focus on three areas of feedback: 360-degree feedback, feedback characteristics, and understanding of the feedback forum.  The 360-degree feedback method utilizes many different people rather than only one single source when delivering positive or corrective feedback. Single source feedback can be biased, controlling and intimidating if it is received from the same person each time. Feedback becomes more balanced when it is received from supervisors, co-workers and others closely related to you (Lassiter, 1996, pg.12). The value of 360-degree feedback cannot be underestimated. The organizational benefit of this type of feedback has two closely but related distinct areas. One is an individual value, that is, when the performance of individual managers is improved, the organization as a whole will benefit. The other is the value that 360-degree feedback provides directly to organizations and their development through performance appraisals.  On an individual basis, it has been known that the success of many corporations is the early identification and development of high potential employees. This is where 360-degree feedback becomes an integral part in an individual's performance. Multiple perspectives from various people are important. The immediate boss may be assumed to be pleased with the manager's performance and think very highly of them as a leader. But the younger subordinate to the manager may think they are a bully, uncooperative and that the manager's leadership skills are lacking. Managers early in their career may be able to change their behavior and subordinate perceptions through the proper use of 360-degree feedback. In high potential development programs, the 360-degree feedback results are used to perform the basis for a development plan. Particularly included in the plan are opportunities to engage in specific kinds of challenging assignments; to be exposed to experts and role models and to experience a feedback-rich environment that assists the individual's performance (Dalton and Hollenbeck, 1996). The popular press continues to shift toward the idea that employees are to look after their own career development and not wait on the organization. This causes the individual to upgrade their portfolio to maintain employability. Some organizations have a do-it- yourself development program. Individuals are given access to 360 degree feedback tools either PC or pencil and paper, that they may gain information about themselves. They can call a company-designated vendor and have the 360-degree materials sent to whomever they wish. Once completed, they are sent back to the vendor, computed and then sent to the employee (Dalton, 1998, pg. 64). What they do with this information is up to them. The problem with this type of feedback style is it leaves the individual open to misinterpretations of their job performance. They have the information of what to improve but not the tools or skills to make the corrective actions. Feedback is best handled and carried out more efficiently when received from a trained facilitator. Negative feedback can be personally explained with ways to improve if a facilitator is present. Many Human Resource professionals prefer to conduct 360-degree feedback processes themselves because it allows them to play a significant role in the development of the employee and the organization as a whole. The use of 360-degree feedback as a performance appraisal has been regarded as an effective tool in assessing employee's performance. When a supervisor can view the feedback report he/she can see where the employee needs improvement and can assist accordingly. The argument for making the 360 degree feedback process part of the performance appraisal process is that, unlike the high potential program in which individuals receive feedback about skills they need to learn for the future, in the appraisal process supervisors and managers receive evaluative feedback about the performance skills that are part of their current job. Using 360-degree feedback for appraisals has two implications for the process: (1) the immediate boss will see the results; they will not be confidential and (2) the individual will be rewarded or punished  (salary increases, promotions, and so on) based on the results (Dalton, 1998, pg. 69). Using 360-degree feedback materials can bring performers up to organizational standards. There are various characteristics for giving feedback, which cannot be overlooked. Feedback should be relevant, limited and descriptive. At the core of every feedback session is the presentation of its data. If feedback is to be effective, it must motivate in a positive manner with relevancy. Managers must understand the characteristics of feedback when counseling a subordinate or sharing with a peer partner. How feedback is presented has a direct impact on how it is received. Feedback must be relevant. Giving information that does not pertain to the situation at hand is useless. The information shared must have a direct impact on the individual's performance as it relates to the organization's overall mission. For instance, giving feedback about the style of a performer's clothes is insignificant if the performer is not meeting company administrative suspense dates. Always keep the main subject in focus. Employees who receive feedback about what someone else is doing in another capacity is also irrelevant. They can, however, only make corrections in their own department or section because they have that area of responsibility. It is the opinion of the writer that feedback does not automatically lead to change. Feedback given to soldiers of the US Army in various organizations is done through fear of punishment. After a season, this style of feedback becomes threatening and produces anxiety. If no positive energy is created, soldiers will not support the mission, respect the leader or ultimately stay with the military. Feedback needs to be limited. A significant problem in hearing feedback is information overload. People become stressed and over whelmed to the point where they are no longer hearing the informer. People have limits to the amount of information they can process at one sitting. Often time’s management will flood the recipient with as much feedback as possible and create an unrealistic session. People have the tendency to stop and mentally process one subject of feedback while the speaker is moving onto the next. Information becomes lost and the feedback session is ineffective. The amount of time spent during a session is imperative. It is recommended for a feedback session to be no longer than 1 hour. Anything more than this may lose the attention of the recipient and defeat the purpose of the feedback. Feedback must be limited to sustain purpose to the performer. Feedback needs to be descriptive. The receiver must be able to relate the feedback to everyday activities within the organization. If the data given to the employee is not specific enough, there is very little to work with and change will not occur. Feedback should be outlined with strengths, weakness and ways to improve the performance. The manager must have a clear objective in mind when counseling the performer of what the end result of the session should be. What exactly does the manager want the performer to be able to do, know or feel at the end of the session? A poor feedback session will leave the employee with no standards to meet or objectives to attain. Ultimately, the performer will fall back to the original substandard because the session was vague, nonspecific and lacked description. Feedback must be descriptive to be effective. Understanding the feedback forum is equally important. What will an employee experience in a feedback meeting? Feedback sessions can often become problematic. A plethora of feelings can over take an individual if they are not prepared to receive the information at hand. Individuals may walk into a feedback meeting with their guard up because of past experiences or current perceptions. Because people do not know what to expect, the number one feeling is anxiety (Nadler, 1977, pg. 153). Those who have not received formal feedback do not know what to expect, what will be said or what the outcome of the session will mean. Because it is not clear, anxiety will occur. People tend to like information about themselves that is positive and constructive. Information that is negative or requires correction on the part of the performer can be met with depression or internal uncertainty. If an employee is mentally unstable, violence may be the end result of the session. Another feeling, which maybe produced, is a sense of defensiveness. Being defensive can get in the way of effective communication and can hinder the ability of the individual to solve current or future problems (Nadler, 1977, pg. 153). Employees must be open to critique and corrective action if they are to be an asset to an organization. The tendency to be defensive is high for the performer. They may perceive that they are doing a perfectly good job at their assignments until they are confronted at a feedback session. The third area of what a performer may experience at a feedback session is fear. Employees may be concern with retribution if they give the wrong answer during feedback. Fear concerning the reactions of other people, particularly people in power, creates expectations that openness by individuals will only lead to negative outcomes (Nadler, 1977, pg. 153). Personally, I have seen this time and time again while counseling with subordinates. It therefore motivates people to be cautious and watch what they say. In some cases, they may not participate at all in the sessions. In the US Army, this is particularly true when asking a junior ranking soldier about the leadership style of his/her superior. The real answers may not be shared for fear of who will hear the response. It is the opinion of the writer that feedback does not automatically lead to change. Feedback given to soldiers of the US Army in various organizations is done through fear of punishment. After a season, this style of feedback becomes threatening and produces anxiety. If no positive energy is created, soldiers will not support the mission, respect the leader or ultimately stay with the military. How can these misdirected feelings be minimized? It is useful to have an agenda with an outline, which serves as a guide to the session. Sharing this with the employee prior to beginning the session will greatly reduce any unwanted anxiety. For many people, there is comfort in knowing that the meeting has been well thought out and planned with a road map. Explain to the performer how the data about their performance was collected. If the employee accepts the validity of the feedback they can minimize their fears that the feedback data is incorrect. Lastly, explain the route in which the feedback will be used. Performers have the right to know who will hear their comments and what will be the repercussion if any. Knowing this information can diminish the amount of defensiveness the performer may display. In conclusion, a good facilitator or administrator recognizes and appreciates the sensitive nature surrounding feedback and takes serious steps to ensure the integrity of the process and support of the individual. If the general perception is that management does not have the individual or organization’s interest at heart, all the meetings in the world will lead to nothing.  Utilizing 360-degree-feedback correctly, being able to identify characteristics and understanding the feedback forum is crucial to the successful outcome of the feedback session." Unquote My Comments: First I would like to commend Mark on his excellent paper. Now coming to the subject, I have already expressed my views on the subject in our pages. Any performance appraisal system should have consistency over a period and it is immaterial which method is followed. All methods have their strengths and limitations. My own experience with the 360-degree system is very limited, as the concept was in the early stages of development and was not satisfactory because of all factors mentioned above by Mark. I have always followed MBO. It is less complicated and less confusing. The subjective elements are minimal. Assuming that the objectives have been drawn up sensibly, the system is very effective. The main reason is fear of reprisal and experience has shown that correct and unpalatable feedback, especially from subordinates, is not well received by many a superior. This also calls for high degree of maturity, self-confidence, absence of bias, focus and assessment skills. There is also a lot of contradictory and confusing feedback. In such situations, to separate the wheat from the chaff is difficult and time consuming. Added on November 27, 2004 : I came across an article titled "How to get the most out of 360 degree feedback" by Gary Yukl and Richard Lepsinger in the reference book published by ICFAI, Hyderabad titled "Performance Management - Concepts and Cases". This article was originally published in the complete new training library by VNU Business Media, Minneapolis, MN , USA. The article is very well written and covers most of the difficulties experienced and how to act upon them. I have been a practicing manager throughout my working life. When one is responsible for results, one does not have the luxury of having enough time for all the HR strategies suggested. We cannot afford to devote too much time on staff issues and when the system is complicated, having too many parameters, we tend to take the eye of the ball. Here lies the crux of the problem. From:  Forquer, MSG Mark W     Date:  Wednesday, September 20, 2000 8:04 PM     To:  madhavan@madgopes.com       Reference:  Permission required: http://madgopes.com/feedback360.html     Greetings my friend, how are you? Yes, I'd be honored if you used the paper. Thank you for your support. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Madhavan T Gopalachary Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2000 8:53 PM To: Forquer, MSG Mark W. Subject: permission required Dear Mark, Greetings and I received your paper in end July, 2000 and sorry to ack., late. I would request your permission to publish the same in my pages. Copy enclosed regards Madhavan Written  by Madhavan T Gopalachary The views, opinions and interpretations are personal. Sponsorship does not mean that the sponsors endorse them. Editorial Policy © Copyright, Oct-08 . www.madgopes.com . Without prejudice. All rights reserved www.mmgindia.com is the official website of Madras Management Group, Chennai, India. www.madgopes.com and www.mmg.name are personal websites and all editorials are published under their banner to retain editorial independence. We would highly appreciate feedback from readers and it may be sent to ipr@mmg.name.