Article 4
360 Degree Feedback Appraisal
Strengths & Weaknesses of 360 Degreed feedback explained.
360 Degree Feedback Appraisal
360-degree feedback is a powerful tool for employee development. It is also known as full-circle appraisal, multi-rater feedback, multi-source feedback, upwards feedback, group performance review, 360-degree appraisal, 540-degree feedback, all-round feedback, and peer appraisal. (Kanaslan EK & Iyem C, 2016).
According to Ward (2004) all these terms convey the same meaning.
A 360 Degree Feedback Appraisal is a valuable tool for providing employees with a comprehensive and well-rounded view of their strengths and areas for improvement. Traditional performance reviews conducted by a single individual, such as a manager, may not always provide a complete picture of an employee’s performance. By gathering feedback from multiple sources, 360 performance surveys offer a more holistic assessment of an employee’s capabilities, behaviors, and skillsets. (Dawn Fletcher, 2024)
By providing individuals with a comprehensive perspective of their strengths and areas necessitating improvement, this feedback-rich context can facilitate targeted enhancement of leadership skills. Consequently, this approach can contribute to cultivating more proficient leaders within university setting (Borge, Egeland, Aarons, Ehrhart, Sklar & Skar, 2022)
Lepsinger and Lucia define 360-degree feedback method as ‘the feedback process which involves collecting perceptions about a person’s behavior and the impact of that behavior.
From the person’s boss or bosses, direct reports, colleagues, fellow members of project teams, internal and external customers, and suppliers’ (Lepsinger and Lucia, 1997). The authors claim that 360-degree feedback and the feedback from various raters are used as synonyms.
There are two common uses of the 360-degree feedback implementation – these are development and appraising and performance management purposes (Atwater et al, 2007; Atwater and Waldman, 1998; Ward, 2004; Tyson and Ward, 2004).
It has been acknowledged that most multi-source feedback techniques have been used with a development emphasis (Fletcher, 2001).
Furthermore, it may be argued that multi-rater feedback practices provide the best results when they are utilized for development rather than performance ratings (Atwater et al., 2007); most research declares that 360 degree approaches provide beneficial results when used for performance evaluating purposes (Ward, 2004; Lepsinger and Lucia, 1997; Gallagher, 2008; Dowling et al, 2008; Carter et al, 2005)
Strengths and Weaknesses of 360 Degree Feedback
Strengths
One suggestion is that multi-rater feedback approach strengthens the contact between the raters and the ratees (Gallagher, 2008). Another positive aspect of multi-source feedback is that by evaluating their boss, raters may feel empowered (Alimo-Metcalfe, 2003).
Opportunity of rating their boss may give employees the experience of power and right to speak. Multi-rater feedback systems provide high quality feedback and are used for performance coaching (Atwater et al., 2007). Feedback from various sources provides more reliable information in order to inform the receivers about the level of their performance
It is declared by Gallagher that multi-rater feedback system leads managers to draw a clear frame of employee strengths and weaknesses; it reveals the ‘blind spots’ of receiver performance (Gallagher, 2008).
Atwater and colleagues (2007) propose that 360-degree feedback practice may diagnose misalignment between internal and external stakeholders. That may lead to communication between them. Deci and Ryan (1985) illustrate that recognition of good performance may improve perceived competence of employees and following that it may enhance intrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan, 1985; cited by Kuvaas, 2007, pp.381).
Gitlespie and Parry (2006) carried out a literature review and found that 360-degree feedback implementations lead to team interactions. 360-degree feedback provides the opportunity for employees to evaluate themselves and the way other people work with them evaluate their behaviour (Rohan-Jones, 2004).
Heathfield (2001) claims that multi-sourced feedback decreases gender, race and age discrimination. Another positive effect of 360-degree feedback is provision of legal protection (Carter et al., 2005; Gitlespie and Parry, 2006)
Weaknesses
Multi-rater feedback implementation requires a substantial amount of cost (Rohan-Jones, 2004; Ward, 2004; Nickols, 2007). This fact may be seen as a limitation of 360-degree feedback implementation. Levy and Albright (1995) illustrated that multiple feedback may cause discrepancies as a result of multiple raters.
There has been a criticism about a free choice of respondents which claims that receivers are likely to choose the raters who are close to them and who like them (Ward, 2004).
Another negative aspect about 360-degree feedback is the threat of negative emphasis of receiver performance (Ward, 2004). The facilitators or the managers, who apply the multi rater feedback tool, may focus on the weakness of the appraiser performance.
Ward (2004) proposes that there may be some difficulties for appraising managers with their new responsibilities and the details that they have to manage. As was set out in the previous sections, 360-degree feedback approach itself is as important as the gathered feedback; therefore, managers have to follow the process carefully and that adds more work to their jobs.
List of references
Ø El Haddad, R., Karkoulian, S., & Nehme, R. (2019). The impact of 360 feedback appraisal system on organizational justice and sustainability: The mediating roles of gender and managerial levels. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 27(3), 712-728.
Ø Rafiq, S., Kahdim, M., & Afzal, A. (2023). The assessment and impact of 360-degree leadership performance appraisal at university level. Journal of Social Sciences Development, 2(2), 189-203.
Ø Karkoulian, S., Srour, J., & Canaan Messarra, L. (2020). The moderating role of 360-degree appraisal between engagement and innovative behaviors. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 69(2), 361-381.
Ø Alimo-Metcalfe B, 1998. 360 Degree Feedback and Leadership Development. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 6, pp.35-44
Ø Atwater LE, Brett JF & Charles AC, 2007. Multisource Feedback: Lessons and Implications for Practice. Human Resources Management, 46(2), pp.285-307.
Ø Atwater, L., & Waldman, D, 1998. 360 Degree Feedback and Leadership Development. Leadership Quarterly, 9(4), pp. 423-426.Lepsinger, R & Lucia AD, 1997, The Art and Science of 360 Degree Feedback. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer/ Jossey-Bass.
Ø Carter A, Kerrin M & Silverman M, 2005. 360 Degree Feedback: Beyond the Spin. Brighton: Institute for Employment Studies.
Ø Dowling PJ, Festing M & Engle AD, 2008. International Human Resource Management. Managing People in a Multinational Context. 5th ed. London: Thomson.
Ø Fletcher C, 2001, Performance appraisal management: the developing research agenda. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 74, pp.473-487.
Ø Gallagher T, 2008. 360 Degree Performance Reviews Offer Valuable perspectives. Financial Executive, December, pp.61.
Ø Gitlespie TL & Parry RO, 2006. Fuel for Litigation? Links Between Procedural Justice and Multisource Feedback. Journal of Managerial Issues, XVIII,(4), pp.530-546.
Ø Heathfield S, 2001. 360 degree feedback: the good, the bad and the ugly defines and examines multirater feedback. Available at: http://humanresources.about.com/library/weekly/aa042501b.htm. [Accessed 10.08.2009].
Ø Kanaslan EK & Iyem C,2016. “Is 360 degree feedback appraisal an effective way of performance evaluation?”, Volume 06, No.05
Ø Kuvaas B, 2007. Different relationships between perceptions of development performance appraisal and work performance. Personnel Review. 36 (3), pp.378-397
Ø Lepsinger R & Lucia AD, 1997, The Art and Science of 360 Degree Feedback. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer/ Jossey-Bass.
Ø Nickols F, 2007. Performance Appraisal: Weighed and Found Wanting in the Balance. The Journal for Quality & Participation, Spring, pp.13-16.
Ø Rohan-Jones R, 2004. 360 Degree Feedback in the Context of Leadership Development in the ADO. (CDCLMS Leadership Paper 1/2004). Centre for Leadership Studies, Australian Defence College, Canberra.
Ø Tyson S & Ward P, 2004. The Use of 360 Degree Feedback Technique in the Evaluation of Management Development, Management Learning, 35(2), pp.205–223
Ø Ward P, 2004. 360 Degree Feedback. Mumbai: Jaico Publishing House.
This could enhance transparency and leadership development when it comes to companies in Sri Lanka, but success depends on proper implementation considering local workplace culture. Very relevant as businesses shift toward data-driven, employee-focused HR practices. Useful read!
ReplyDeleteDear Cassim, Thanks for commenting.
DeleteThe increasing shift towards data-driven and employee-focused HR practices globally makes this topic highly relevant for Sri Lankan businesses looking to enhance their competitiveness and attract and retain top talent. Embracing these modern approaches, while carefully considering local cultural factors, can be a powerful driver of organizational growth and employee satisfaction in Sri Lanka.
This blog article offers a thorough and perceptive summary of 360-degree feedback together with its advantages and shortcomings. One important lesson is how, by including input from many sources, 360-degree feedback may produce a more complete and well-rounded perspective of employee performance. Particularly for leadership development, this can be a game-changer since it lets people see areas they might not be aware of need improvement.
ReplyDeleteStill, one should also take into account the possible difficulties like the expenses and possible rater selection bias. When used carefully and with the correct emphasis, the advantages of this feedback tool—such as greater communication, lower discrimination, and better team interactions—outweigh the negatives.
Although it is not a one-size-fits-all solution, 360-degree feedback can be a very effective tool for promoting development inside a company when utilized for purposes other than performance evaluations. The secret is to approach it carefully and make sure the procedure is set to maximize its possibilities for significant comments.
Dear Wasana
ReplyDeleteYou have summarized that 360-degree feedback is not a panacea but a powerful tool for development when used for purposes other than strict performance evaluations is a critical insight. When the focus is on growth and learning, rather than solely on judgment and reward, individuals are more likely to receive feedback openly and utilize it constructively. You've correctly identified that the "secret is to approach it carefully and make sure the procedure is set to maximize its possibilities for significant comments." (Church & Bracken, 1997; Goldsmith & Underhill, 2001)
The blog clearly defines the pros and cons of 360-degree feedback. It is an extremely handy tool for providing employees balanced feedback regarding their strengths and limitations, thereby proving to be helpful in development and performance management. The blog highlights its ability to uncover blind spots, empower employees, and reduce discrimination.
ReplyDelete