Strategy 2: Select the Right Raters
I chose the second strategy because I feel that the successful 360-degree feedback method
has not been exposed enough to managers making pay decisions or conducting employee
appraisals despite its evidence-based success.
The authors of our textbook further my point as they stated “One clear path to
maximizing reliability when ratings are used, inter-rater reliability, is to use multiple raters. That
is accomplished by including more than one rater per source and/or using multiple types of
sources” (Newman & Gerhart, 2020, p. 403).
This method employs five different assessors who each review and evaluate the
employee’s performance. Up to 80% of the input is given by the supervisor but peers, customers,
subordinates and the employee themselves still play an important part of this process (Newman
& Gerhart, 2020). For example, an evaluation from one’s peer is useful because they understand
the job and have a clear perspective of how to accurately perform the duties. Similarly, a
customer’s feedback is highly valuable and welcomed in most businesses, so it is no wonder
their input is appreciated.
Baily & Austin (2006) performed a study using the 360-degree model and found that “All these
approaches suggest that when individuals receive negative feedback (ratings which indicate a
short-fall in performance, relative to some standard), they will be motivated to reduce the
discrepancy, and make efforts to improve their performance” (p. 53).
Understanding how raters process information and training them to rate more accurately
are both great strategies but I chose strategy two because I feel that selecting the right raters will
naturally solve that problem. Although this method has its obvious disadvantages such as
stereotyping or possible tension between coworkers, the success rate and flexibility it offers has
caught the attention of organizations nationwide with some companies claiming that the 365-
degree model has “outperformed their old systems in improving employee understanding and
self-awareness, promoting communication between supervisors and staff, and promoting better
performance and results" (Newman & Gerhart, 2020, p. 41)
In conclusion, considering multiple points of view about a person’s performance is a
good strategy for improving the accuracy of performance appraisals and related ratings. This
reminds me of Proverbs 11:14 that says, “Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an
abundance of counselors there is safety” (NIV).
References
Bailey, C., & Austin, M. (2006). 360 degree feedback and developmental outcomes: The role of
feedback characteristics, Self Efficacy and importance of feedback dimensions to focal ‐
managers' current role. (1), 51-66. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14
doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00333.x
Gerhart, B. A., & Newman, J.M. (2020). Compensation (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
New International Version. (2011). New International Version. https://www.biblica.com/bible/
(Original work published 1973)
