Feedback 2 Assignments

the_truth_about_360deg_assessments.pdf

Home >Human Resource Management homework help >Feedback 2 Assignments

Chapter 5

THE TRUTH ABOUT 360º ASSESSMENTS

I had no idea. (Accounting Supervisor, responding to the results of a 360˚ Assessment.)

Most supervisors are evaluated by their bosses. The performanceappraisal forms are filled out by the boss only, and it is the boss who determines if the supervisor’s work has been satisfactory, if there are work behaviors that need improving, and if a raise or bonus is war - ranted. Traditional performance appraisal meetings (or “reviews,” “evalua -

tions,” or “assessments”) are usually limited to the boss and the super - visor. But the observations of the boss are only one perspective. There is another approach to evaluating supervisors, the 360° assess-

ment. In this approach, the organization recognizes that many workers are aware of the supervisor’s performance, and they should all have the opportunity to provide feedback. In a 360° assessment (referred to as a “360”), the boss evaluates, and

so do co-workers. A supervisor who is the subject of a 360 will be eval - uated by other supervisors (or “peers”), by all of the bosses who are familiar with the work of the supervisor, and by employees who are being supervised. In some 360 assessments, the supervisor even com - pletes a self-evaluation to compare with the perspectives of co-workers. Since the 360 is for performance development it is also used to eval -

uate team leaders, senior managers, and other employees. It is not intended to be a formal appraisal, but a tool for identifying specific areas of improvement in work behaviors. It provides thorough feed - back, so that those who are evaluated are aware of how their work habits and behaviors affect everyone around them. It is a valuable

149

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

rl es C T ho ma s. A ll r ig ht s re se rv ed . Ma y no t be r ep ro du ce d in a ny f or m wi th ou t pe rm is si on f ro m th e pu bl is he r, e xc ep t fa ir u se s pe rm it te d un de r U. S. o r ap pl ic ab le

co py ri gh t la w.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/4/2017 9:00 AM via TRIDENT UNIVERSITY AN: 389202 ; Carelli, Anne O'Brien.; The Truth About Supervision : Coaching, Teamwork, Interviewing, Appraisals, 360° Assessments, and Recognition Account: s3642728

The Truth About Supervision150

resource for determining exactly what behaviors need modification, and what skills are respected and appreciated. The 360 must be conducted carefully, because co-workers eval -

uating each other can be a sensitive process. This chapter provides realistic, detailed information on the design and implementation of a 360° assessment program. (Note that Chapter 4, “The Truth About Performance Appraisals,” provides further information about review- ing the results of the 360° assessments with employees.)

1. WHAT EXACTLY IS A 360?

A “360” is an assessment system that is used to evaluate employees. It is usually used to evaluate managers, but can also be used for eval - uating team leaders, senior executives, supervisors, frontline employ - ees, or other staff. The results are used for employee development and goal-setting. The 360 is different from other evaluation systems because it in-

volves gathering written feedback from just about anyone who inter - acts on a regular basis with the employee being evaluated. Copies of the same form are given to all evaluators, known as “raters.” For example, suppose Judy is a manager of a shipping department,

and it is time for her performance appraisal. If the organization uses a 360, then Judy will be evaluated by her boss, her co-workers at the same level (“peers”), and the people that she supervises. She may also be evaluated by her customers, as well as vendors, truck drivers, and dispatchers, if they are particularly familiar with Judy’s work. All of these raters could complete an evaluation form. All of the evaluation forms are combined into one report. Some 360 systems give the employees the opportunity to assess

themselves. They can then compare their personal perspective with the perspectives of co-workers. Think of a circle (measuring 360 degrees), and put the employee

who is being evaluated right in the center. Everyone around the em- ployee would be considered a good source of feedback and may be asked to complete a 360 assessment form.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 151

2. HOW CAN THE RESULTS BE USED?

The 360 assessment is supposed to be used as a developmental tool, giving employees a chance to focus on areas that need improvement. Although it may be used as a formal evaluation system, the real pur - pose of the 360 is to gather feedback from multiple sources and iden - tify how employees can do a better job. It is also used to recognize and reward employees for positive work performance. It is most effective when the subject of the 360 (the person being

evaluated) can discuss the results with a supervisor and make a per - formance action plan for the future.

3. WHAT TERMS ARE USED IN THE 360 PROCESS?

In the lexicon of 360 assessments: Subject: the person being evaluated Rater: the person doing the evaluating (sometimes all of the raters are referred to as the “stakeholders”) Peer: a rater who is at the same level in the organization as the sub- ject (such as a supervisor evaluating another supervisor) Boss: any rater who supervises the subject (such as a vice president evaluating a manager) Team/Employees/Staff/Direct Reports: those raters who are ev- aluating their supervisors or a subject located above them in the organizational hierarchy (such as a senior manager) External Rater: a customer, client, vendor, etc. who does business with the subject’s organization on a regular basis

Note that sometimes 360 assessments are referred to as “multi-rater feedback,” “full circle,” “peer review,” or “upward appraisals.” These are not particularly accurate terms, but they do show up in the litera - ture.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision152

4. HOW IS THE 360 USUALLY IMPLEMENTED?

Many organizations, especially smaller companies, create their own 360 system, including devising the evaluation forms that will be used. There are also companies that offer guidance and software systems

for implementing a 360 assessment program. If purchasing such a sys- tem, it is important to choose a system that will meet the goals of the organization and will provide information that is useful to the subject. Once there is a better understanding of the process, it is easier to deter - mine the best resource to use. Usually an organization will follow the steps below. Tips for imple -

menting the steps are described in further detail in the sections that fol - low.

1. Determine if the organizational philosophy and culture can sup- port the 360 concept.

2. Identify the people who are going to be evaluated (the subjects). 3. Determine who will evaluate them (the raters). 4. Identify or create the evaluation forms that will be used. 5. Determine a time frame for completion of the forms. 6. Determine a process for disseminating and collecting the forms. 7. Determine what will be done with the results. 8. Check the entire process for fairness and confidentiality. 9. Set up a pilot. 10. Explain the entire process to the subjects and raters. 11. Test-run the 360 and make adjustments. 12. Conduct the 360 for a larger group. 13. Share results individually with subjects. 14. Follow up with plans for performance improvement. 15. Follow up with recognition for positive results.

5. DO 360s WORK?

A 360 feedback system can be very helpful to employees if it is car - ried out carefully. Too often traditional performance appraisals consist of the boss

meeting privately with the employee, giving just the supervisor’s per -

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 153

spective on work performance. The point of the 360 is to get many dif- ferent perspectives. If 360s are done well, subjects can find out exactly what they need

to work on in the future. They can receive specific information about their work skills and behaviors, and learn how they are viewed by dif - ferent groups. The boss, or supervisor, may have one point of view, but peers may see work performance differently. For example, a team leader may discover from the 360 results that

the boss always feels well informed, and considers the team leader’s communication to be excellent. The team, however, may provide feed- back that they feel left out of the loop because the team leader focuses on communicating with the boss! Now the team leader knows that communication with the team has to improve. Subjects can also find out where they excel. Many employees have

been pleased to discover from 360 results that co-workers recognize improvement and specific skills. Their strengths may be acknowl - edged, resulting in positive reinforcement directly from colleagues.

6. CAN 360s BACKFIRE?

Yes. 360 assessment systems can backfire if they do not have:

• a fair process for identifying evaluators (or raters) who truly know the work behaviors of the person being evaluated • clear instructions to raters • quick, easy forms to complete • attention to confidentiality • a time frame that allows for quick and efficient gathering of evalu - ations • clear definition of staff involvement in the 360 process • a plan for following up on the results • policies for protecting the records, handling grievances related to the results, and allowing access to the data (as with any other per - formance review system).

In addition, subjects may be uncomfortable being evaluated by peo - ple who are unaware of their accomplishments, who may not like them personally, or who do not have much say about raises and pro motions.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision154

Raters may feel uncomfortable filling out forms about their col - leagues, especially if they have some negative things to say. On the other hand, they may take advantage of the opportunity to unload their negative opinions. This can be especially damaging if the subject did not see it coming. The entire 360 process should be explained in detail, giving employ-

ees enough time to digest the information and ask questions. (In other words, do not suddenly send out an evaluation form without warning.) The protection of the privacy of employees and the use of the data should be clear. The key is to recognize that the feedback is a composite picture and

is a resource for determining what to do next. If the employee has a pattern of weak spots that are revealed by the 360 assessment, then the next step is to figure out a plan for eliminating those weak spots. Ideally, this plan is created by the employee working with a supervi sor who can help with strategies and techniques.

7. CAN 360s BE BIASED?

Although it is not possible to eliminate all bias in the process, there are ways of ensuring that the results of the 360s will be fair. Keep in mind that raters may:

• hesitate before being completely forthright about a co-worker’s weaknesses • worry about being discovered as the rater who gave negative responses • not want to get involved in evaluating a subject who is known to be struggling (especially if they feel that the 360 will provide doc - umentation for discipline or termination) • see the 360 as an opportunity to shed a bad light on a subject who is competition • see the 360 as a chance to exaggerate a subject’s strengths because of a personal relationship.

These are just some of the ways that the process can quickly become biased.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 155

However, standard appraisal procedures can also be riddled with bias. Not all supervisors approach the traditional performance apprais- al process with an open, unbiased mind. A 360 can at least gather from a variety of sources so that bias can be reduced. If it appears that the organization has a culture that promotes fierce

internal competition, blame, second-guessing, and other behaviors that pit employees against one another, then it may not be advisable to attempt a 360 assessment approach. In fact, it might be necessary to work on creating a more comfortable culture before attempting any type of appraisal process. Bias can be reduced by:

• using a process to select raters who will provide a thorough, fair picture of performance • paying close attention to confidentiality • presenting information to raters about how they may be uninten - tionally biased, and how they should concentrate on the behaviors they have personally witnessed, preferably over the last year. They are not rating the subject on personal life, on relationships and past history, or on what they have heard. They should skip any parts that they cannot answer with confidence.

On occasion, raters may indicate that they do not feel qualified to complete the assessment form, or they feel that their relationship with the subject will bias the results (negatively or positively). They may be excluded if that seems appropriate, but their primary task is to give their own personal perspective on the work behaviors that they have observed. These observations will be combined with several others so that a broad picture of behavior can be obtained. Peers may hesitate to be honest about co-workers at the same level.

Subjects completing a self-evaluation form may be concerned about evaluating themselves too high or too low, especially if their supervi - sor may misconstrue the results. All of these concerns can be appeased if the process is explained thoroughly, and if supervisors are well trained on how to interpret and discuss results. Emphasis should always be on the goal of creating a composite picture of work behav - iors. Of course, not everyone will be completely comfortable. But the

overall results can be informative and any “outliers” or scores that seem to stand out can be discussed with the supervisor.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision156

8. WHEN IS AN ORGANIZATION PREPARED TO IMPLEMENT A 360?

The design and implementation of a 360 assessment can be a night- mare if the organization has not created a plan and analyzed sev eral different aspects of the program. Why a nightmare? For starters, a 360 can be logistically complex; a poorly crafted assessment can be useless to the employees or the leadership; and the 360 results can be misin- terpreted or misused. But with careful planning it can be a valu able tool for both the subjects and the organization. This chapter provides information that can help organizations to plan a successful 360 assess- ment process. In order to avoid potential hazards, it is recommended that the organization make decisions about the following questions before getting started:

What is our purpose for the 360? What will be done with the results?

It is essential that these two questions be settled first. Once the orga - nization is comfortable with the purpose and the application of the 360 assessment, the following questions should be addressed:

• Who needs to be briefed on the purpose and process of the 360? • Who will be evaluated? • Will it be voluntary or mandatory? • Will there be a pilot group? • How many co-workers will complete the assessments, and from what levels of the organization? • Who will be the primary contact person to oversee the process? • Will outside sources be utilized? • How will senior management demonstrate support for the 360 process? • What assessment forms will be used? • Will employees/unions be involved in designing the assessments? • Will quantitative assessments be supplemented by narrative, other perfor mance reviews, or interviews? • What resources (time, money, support staff, technology) will be needed? • How will confidentiality be maintained? • What if a rater hesitates to complete the form?

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 157

• How will the assessments be administered, gathered, and summarized? • What will the subjects receive? • Will entire groups be summarized? • Who will see the results? • What will be done with results that need special attention? • Who will get a copy of the results? • How will the results be discussed with the subjects? • Who will need training in action plan development? • What resources are needed for following up on results? • What will be the time frame for the entire process? • How will the entire 360 process be evaluated to see if it was successful?

An organization is not prepared to implement a 360 if employee confidence has not been taken into consideration. If the employees are concerned that the results will be used deliberately for criticism and discipline, that the process will lack confidentiality, or that the assess - ment form or selection of raters will be biased, then the organization is not ready. Of course, some employees will be skeptical, especially if the direc -

tion to participate in a 360 comes from senior levels, with little expla - nation. It is essential that the purpose and process of the 360 be explained, allowing employees to share questions and concerns. An organization is ready if it can genuinely inform employees that they are utilizing 360s for the purpose of employee development, as well as employee recognition. Sharing specific information about how the results will be stored and reviewed is critical. A vital determinant of success of 360 assessments is the attitude of

senior leaders. Enthusiasm and support for the process, clear commu - nication, and thorough follow-through are essential.

9. WHO SHOULD BE EVALUATED?

A 360 can be part of an ongoing performance review process, used whenever an employee is scheduled for an appraisal. It can also be a mass evaluation so that patterns of strengths and weaknesses across a large group can be determined. For example, one organization con - ducted 360 assessments on all supervisors for the sole purpose of defin- ing future training needs.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision158

Before determining the subjects, decide how the results will be used. If it is a developmental tool, then new supervisors may be the initial target group, or experienced managers may benefit from feedback from a variety of co-workers, rather than from one boss. A 360 should not be used for promoting an employee from a group

of competing subjects. For example, if there is a lucrative opening in the Marketing Department and only in-house candidates are undergo - ing a 360 review, it may look like the results will be used to determine who gets the new job. Raters figure out very quickly that they may have someone’s future in their hands, and they could either be uncom - fortable with that power — or really relish it! It is best to stay away from using a 360 to determine who gets the next promotion. However, the results can certainly be added to the collection of

information on an employee, but only if behavior after discussion of the results is also taken into consideration. For example, perhaps the assess- ment results showed that a supervisor could benefit from a con flict res- olution class to gain assistance in supervising a difficult team of employees. Did the supervisor take the class and use the information to mediate team problems? The follow-up to the 360 should be empha - sized. If this is the first attempt at 360 assessments, it is best to start with a

small group. No matter what the size of the group, a database will have to be established in order to keep track of the assessments and the results. Once the number of subjects reaches 25, it is best to have a sup- port system that can process the data, such as a software package specifically designed for 360 assessments.

10. HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHO WILL DO THE EVALUATING?

This is tricky. The goal is to select co-workers at different levels of the organization who will give a fair assessment based on their knowl- edge of the subject and their desire to promote employee develop- ment. It is advisable to keep the list of raters under 20 people or the process can become cumbersome, especially for those who are evalu- ating several co-workers. It is important that subjects are evaluated by raters who are familiar

with their work, even if it is just one aspect of their work. For example,

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 159

suppose Sam handles purchase orders and interacts with anyone who submits a purchase order. His colleagues in the Accounting Depart- ment, the engineers who work with Sam on ordering equip ment for capital projects, and the shipping supervisor are also familiar with how well Sam performs crucial parts of his job. Sam’s list of raters should include those individuals, especially since they are aware of different aspects of Sam’s job responsibilities, and since they may represent dif- ferent levels of the organizational hierarchy. There are different strategies for selecting raters:

• The subjects select the raters, choosing those people with whom they work on a regular basis. (Keep in mind that their list should be reviewed by someone who is familiar with their job, or they might conveniently leave off people who may give them negative feedback.) • The subjects provide a list of suggested raters, selecting supervi - sors, peers, and subordinates. The list is then reviewed for addi - tions or deletions by the Human Resources/Personnel Department or a senior manager. • The supervisor or Human Resources/Personnel selects the raters. • Raters who work with the subject volunteer to evaluate. • Some organizations provide a list of suggested raters and the sub - ject gets to select from the list. This may allow the subject to elim - inate someone who they feel will give them a particularly negative result. If it looks as though the negative rater will skew the rest of the results, this process may be a fair one.

The key to the selection of raters is to make sure that there is a dis - tribution of co-workers who have a good idea of the work performance of the person they are about to evaluate.

11. WHAT IF THE RATER CANNOT WITNESS SOME OF THE BEHAVIORS?

The evaluation form should include all behaviors that are expected, but they should be behaviors that can actually be witnessed by co- workers.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision160

For example, an organization may want all employees to focus on customers, but how often do the raters get to see actual employee–cus - tomer interaction? How can they evaluate an employee on a behavior that they never get a chance to witness? Of course, raters may not witness all work behaviors. They may

observe the employee working in their department, but not in activi - ties outside the department. For example, co-workers may not witness a salesperson interact with clients off-site, but they do see office inter- action and follow-up to client meetings. Raters should not be expected to guess about some behaviors, but rate on what they personally observe. All forms should allow raters to indicate that a behavior is either not

applicable (N/A) or simply not witnessed (N/W). Then raters do not find themselves giving a negative or false response just because they have not seen the behavior.

12. HOW CAN CONFIDENTIALITY BE GUARANTEED?

Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed. Every effort should be made to keep the process private and confidential, but people will still talk. Raters may compare notes with their colleagues and may talk to the subject about the process. Even on-line rating systems can be verbally discussed if not printed and shared. Raters may react with consternation if they feel that their handwrit -

ing can be traced on hard copy forms, online assessments can be tracked, or codes on forms can be deciphered. If they have things to say that they feel are important for the company to know, they may not say them if they feel that they will be “discovered.” In addition, the subject often knows who is doing the evaluating, so

the subject may try to figure out where the results came from. For example, if a subject is going to be evaluated by one supervisor, four peers, and three team members, it may not be hard to determine who said what. This can usually be settled by merging the data from sever- al sources, making it difficult to determine isolated responses. On-line programs often provide a summary of the results rather than individ- ual scores on assessment items. The results can also be grouped by raters (boss, peers, self, and team/employees) unless the organization determines that the results are anonymous if this breakdown is not pro- vided.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 161

Strategies That Will Encourage Confidentiality:

• Stress the importance of professional treatment of the process. • Do not require rater names, or code names, to be written on the evaluation forms. • Distribute hard copy forms to the raters in a private setting (not through personal mail or at a general meeting) if raters are to remain anonymous. • Expect the forms to be completed at work. It will be tempting for raters to complete online forms off the worksite, but it is important to limit distractions and eliminate the possibility of observers as they complete the forms. • Establish a place for the forms to be completed (such as a confer ence room) so that they are not being filled out in a setting that has inter- ruptions. Or conduct the process online with security measures. • Establish one person who will oversee the distribution and collec - tion of forms (someone who is well recognized for being discreet). Companies that provide online 360 assessment programs will often provide off-site distribution, collection, tracking of comple- tion, and analysis of results. • Store the forms at a site that cannot be accessed by staff in general. • Establish a data system that cannot be accessed by staff in general. • Limit distribution of the results to the subject and the supervisor(s) who will be responsible for performance improvement.

13. HOW CAN THE PAPERWORK BE REDUCED WHEN IMPLEMENTING A 360?

A 360 process can involve a lot of paper. The most efficient means of conducting a 360 is to do it online because it reduces the time involved in gathering and collecting, and with some programs, the results can be collated and summarized. If the forms must be completed manually, consider these tips:

• Keep the forms simple, short, and to the point. • Select small groups to be assessed, conducting periodic 360s. • Establish one person to collect and file information at one collec - tion point.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision162

• Set up a collection system that allows for immediate filing of com- pleted forms (in the subject’s 360 file). • Color-code the boss, self, peer, and team forms.

14. WHAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WHEN A 360 IS COMPLETED ELECTRONICALLY?

Electronic 360 assessments are an efficient substitute for paper and pencil methods. Software programs or online assessments, available from businesses (often found on the Internet), can provide:

• assistance in developing forms • electronic distribution and collection • e-mail instruction, reminders, and time frames • data security • data compilation and summarizing • highlight of areas of development and training • links to learning resources • identification of trends, strong areas of performance, historical pat - terns, goal-setting guides, and action plan outlines • continuous tips.

(“Key words” for tracking down 360 programs on the Internet include: performance review, 360 degree, assessment, evaluation, employee development, and feedback tools.) Raters can complete 360 assessment forms online, but will feel com-

fortable with the process only if they believe that it is confidential. Electronic collection of data can be speedy, especially if time frames for completion are clear. For example, one company alerted raters that the forms would be e-mailed for a 1:00 p.m. appointment, with the understanding that the 360s would be completed privately online at that time. Before selecting an online 360 system, supervisors should make sure

that they are comfortable with the following components of the pro- gram:

• quick and easy forms are developed that are both narrative and rating scales

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 163

• employees have easy access any time and dates of assessments are staggered to avoid rater overload • the system is self-paced with clear directions • evaluation criteria can be selected and forms can be customized for the organization or occupation • the system is securely hosted and confidentiality of raters is main- tained • reminder messages can be sent and completions can be monitored • technical assistance can be provided to raters • personal reports can be downloadable by subjects, and reports are readable and helpful • access to results is limited to personnel identified by the organization.

Some on-line programs have additional services, such as interpreta- tion of results for individual subjects and suggestions for goals and action plans. Some provide links to performance development re- sources. More elaborate systems identify employees with outstanding skills

and high-potential groups to assist senior management in making per- sonnel decisions. Electronic completion can get complicated if an employee is filling

out forms for several different co-workers. For example, a supervisor may be completing several assessments on fellow supervisors, while completing forms on senior managers and employees. It is essential to look closely at the availability of the forms, the timing of their com - pletion and, of course, the possibility of technological glitches. Another electronic alternative is the interactive voice response sys -

tem (IVR), which allows raters the opportunity to answer a series of questions on the phone. The IVR system collates the data. Although this process allows for quick completion, it does not necessarily allow raters time to think about their responses and to look over the entire assessment when they are done. Although raters should not be encour - aged to change their initial responses, quite often raters will review their assessments to make sure that they gave fair and accurate pic tures of their perceptions of the subject’s work behaviors. In reflection, some answers may have to be changed. The IVR allows for speed of form completion and immediacy of results, but does not allow raters extra time to contemplate responses.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision164

15. WHAT FORMS SHOULD BE USED?

There are many evaluation forms available in software packages, in Human Resources literature, and on the Internet. The difficulty is cre- ating or selecting forms that will produce results that are actually use- ful. Forms should be designed so that they are not very time-consuming

and are accompanied by an opportunity for raters to add narrative notes that elaborate upon the numbers. A one-page form that has 25 questions (preferably with 1–4 rating) is usually quite sufficient as long as a second page is attached that allows for written comments. The most important question to ask before selecting or creating a

form is: What does the organization want to know? Select work behav - iors and attitudes that are important to the company. Ask employees to help design the questions so that they can identify what they want to know for personal development, and so that they have an invest ment in the process. Tailor the forms for different jobs. Select items from job descriptions. Are the same behaviors and skills required from the heavy equipment operators as from the website developers? Should individuals in the Human Resources/Personnel Department be evalu- ated with the same criteria as the Sales Department person nel? Some organizations may say that all employees should be evaluated

on the same types of performance. Their jobs may be different, but they are all expected to be customer focused, to possess strong com - munication skills, and to have excellent attendance records. They should be evaluated with the same criteria, across the board. Other organizations may assess the same baseline skills across the

board with all personnel, but may add specific expectations for differ - ent jobs. For example, the 360 criteria for executives may be different from the list of expected behaviors of frontline personnel. The final list of criteria depends upon what the organization values and what it wants to measure. When selecting the content and format of the forms, it is also impor -

tant to determine what the final results will look like, and how the results will be compiled for the subject.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 165

16. WHAT DO 360 RESULTS LOOK LIKE?

The 360 assessment results are generally compiled into one report. Scores are averaged and written comments are typed up and attached. The results are more informative if the subject can see results overall, as well as results broken down by boss, peer, self, and team/employ - ees. This way subjects can get very specific information about how they behave around different groups. They can also see how their self- perception compares to the perceptions of the other raters. Some organizations prefer to have the subject’s supervisor summa -

rize the written comments verbally, so that raters will feel more com - fortable writing comments. The raters can write specific details with out worrying about whether they will be identified by the subject. In more complex reports, the subject can see exactly how raters

marked a particular skill. For example, the subject may see that five raters marked a “4” for presentation skills, and three raters marked a “3.” If the report goes into further detail, the subject may see that the “4s” were all from peers, and the “3s” from bosses. The subject then discovers that “presentation skills” are perceived overall as very good with co-workers believing them to be excellent, but supervisors (or bosses) are still looking for some improvement. The narrative com - ments in the report may clarify what the supervisors are looking for, or the subject can discuss the results with a supervisor and create a relat- ed action plan. The reports should be designed so that the results are clear and suc -

cinct and easy to interpret. If the subject spends more time trying to comprehend how to read the data than interpreting the results, the report is unnecessarily complex. The report should be presented so that comparisons between groups can be done quickly, written com - ments are tied to specific questions, and the content is arranged logi - cally. (Before selecting a 360 vendor, it is important to check out the design of the final reports.) Organizations can also get a general picture of the subjects as a

group by combining all of the scores of all of the subjects. For exam - ple, if 17 managers participated in the 360, all of their scores can be averaged, and patterns of highs and lows of the entire group high - lighted. The leadership of the organization may discover that more training is needed in customer service, or that the managers excel in

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision166

speedy decision-making. This information can be used for organiza - tional goal-setting and budgeting.

17. SHOULD A SELF-ASSESSMENT BE INCLUDED?

In most 360 assessments, the subject receives a report that has an average score for each behavior that has been evaluated. The boss, peer, and team scores are combined and averaged. If the results of the 360 consist of one combined rating from the boss, peers, and team, then the addition of “self” scores may lend confusion to the general picture. The self scores could skew the results. It would be hard to tell how personal perspectives align with the perspectives of co-work ers because all of the scores are blended together. However, if the results are broken out so that the subject can com -

pare reactions from the different groups, it can be quite enlightening to compare results to the self scores. How do peers rate a work behavior as compared to the subject’s rating of self? Does the boss agree with the self-assessment of the subject? When self scores match other scores, the results can be encouraging.

When subjects discover that their own self-perception is dramatically different that of their colleagues, they will need to discuss these percep- tions with their supervisor and analyze strategies for the future.

18. SHOULD CUSTOMERS BE INVOLVED IN THE 360?

Involve customers (external raters) if:

• They frequently interact with the subject and are very familiar with the job requirements and behaviors of the subject. • They are comfortable that the process is fair and anonymous, and they are willing to participate. • The customer feedback is valued as a reliable perspective. • The customer feedback can influence individual behavior. • The results are not used to determine overall customer satisfaction, but the customer’s view of one individual’s job-related behaviors. • The customers have been well trained on the purpose and guide - lines of the 360 process.

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 167

• Customer involvement in organizational procedures is routine. • There is a desire to promote the organization’s emphasis on cus - tomer feedback.

In addition to customers, other external contacts such as vendors, suppliers, and partner agencies can be valuable contributors to the 360 process.

19. HOW CAN 360s HELP AN ORGANIZATION?

360s can be used for employee and team development, formal per - formance appraisals, major organizational changes, and surgical improvements in the organization. Obviously, the leaders of organizations desire to tap the talents,

skills, and ideas of employees. When an organization implements a 360 assessment process, it sends the message that a thorough, fair eval- uation is valued and that the organization will work to identify skills and will cultivate employee improvement. It sends the message that employee input is valued and that the organization strives to recognize employee strengths. The organization gains improved communication, skill identifica -

tion, and, hopefully, changed behaviors. Employees generally think that they have a pretty good idea of how

they are doing at work, but they can often be unaware of the impact of some of their behaviors on co-workers. If employees have been receiv- ing regular feedback in informal dialogues and formal perfor mance appraisals, then a 360 will provide more detailed information from a variety of sources about where the organization should spend time, money, and energy on improvements. A 360 can give employees the opportunity to compare their per -

sonal view of their work behaviors with the views of their colleagues. Sometimes it is quite a surprise! For example, Ben thought that he was an organized and efficient supervisor. His 360 feedback showed that the employees he supervised all agreed with him. So did his boss. However, his fellow supervisors indicated in their 360 appraisals that he appeared to them to be disorganized, communicating mixed mes - sages to different departments and causing confusion. Ben immedi - ately knew that he needed to focus on improving communication and

Co py ri gh t © 2 01 0. C ha

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision168

planning with his fellow supervisors. If the organization had used a tra - ditional performance appraisal system, limiting the process to just the boss and Ben, then Ben may not have known that there was a prob lem with the supervisors. It helps to look at 360s as a process that will provide valuable infor -

mation about:

• individual employees • teamwork • organizational climate • customer service issues • training needs • mission alignment • patterns of concern • problems that need to be addressed.

If administered efficiently and fairly, 360s can be a critical resource for organizational planning and decision-making. Organizations may also wish to use the 360 in conjunction with

employee surveys and customer service research, to get an overall pic - ture of the status of the organization.

20. HOW CAN A 360 HELP EMPLOYEES?

If the 360 assessment is implemented, employees benefit in the fol - lowing ways:

• Organizational expectations are clarified because the 360 forms specifically identify what the organization expects to witness. • Results can reveal specific strengths and areas that need improve ment, as perceived by identified groups (i.e., boss, peers, team/employees). • Subjects can see if their self-perceptions are accurate. • Results can be used as part of a progression plan and for identify - ing opportunities for advancement and other plans for the future. • Results can answer the question “How am I doing?” without the need for supervisors to express the answer verbally to an employ - ee, giving only one point of view.

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 169

• Results can be used for determining training needs or for reinforc - ing training requests. • Results can be a useful intervention tool for supplementing coach - ing and for assisting a subject before discipline or termination may be necessary. • The 360 process can assist employees in expressing their observa - tions and concerns in a confidential manner. • Employees can feel invested in improving performance in an orga - nization that recognizes the value of employee feedback.

21. WHAT IF THE 360 RESULTS ARE ALARMING?

The results of the 360 assessments should be reviewed as soon as possible because, on occasion, the results will reveal a significant prob - lem with an employee, or with a department or team. Action should be taken immediately. If the findings show behaviors that appear to be illegal, unethical, or

in violation of company policy or procedures, then the Human Re- sources/Personnel Department may have to be involved in deter - mining the appropriate steps to be taken. If the findings indicate that a subject needs immediate attention in the form of coaching or coun - seling, then intervention should be taken as quickly as possible by an appropriate, trained supervisor or Human Resources/Personnel spe - cialist. It is important for organizations to determine in advance how to

handle problems that show up in the 360 results. These questions should be discussed prior to the implementation of the 360:

• Who should be informed that there may be a problem? • What steps will be followed to protect the rights of the employees while pur suing what is best for co-workers and the organization? • How will the credibility and confidentiality of the 360 be main- tained if intervention is taken that is obviously the result of the 360 assessment? • How will the privacy of raters be protected?

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision170

22. HOW CAN A 360 ENCOURAGE TEAMWORK?

Leaders of team-based organizations might assume that the 360 is a perfect way for members of teams to evaluate each other. Instead of using the full 360 process, just the team members evaluate each other. This process is often called a “peer review.” It is not a true 360 because supervisors and other employees are usually not involved. It takes exceptional employees in well-established (often referred to

as “fully functioning”) teams to be able to comfortably evaluate their own team members. Peer review should be implemented only when there is already ongoing, open feedback about the performance of the individual team members and the team as an entire group. Even then it should be carried out only if the team members are comfortable with the process, and feel as if they can be candid and the results will be welcomed. Once again, the purpose of using a 360 for peer review should be for performance development. For example, suppose that John is a member of a six-person engi -

neering design team. The other five members evaluate his work behav- iors, all using the same form. The results are given to him, sum - marized. He now knows what his team thinks of his work. What hap - pens next? How blindsided will John be? Who will work with John on personal development? How will the results affect his level of comfort in working with the team in the future? John should be able to have an open discussion with the team to clarify concerns and to develop a plan of action. The 360 process can be useful to team leaders who work closely

with their teams but would appreciate more formal, objective feed - back. Again, in a true team-based structure, there should be continu - ous opportunities for teams and their leaders to evaluate communica - tion, goal achievement, customer service, production, quality, etc. When performance on the part of any employee, including the team leaders, needs improving, the team members (if the team is function - ing well) should work together on skill development. The results of a 360 assessment of the team leader can be used for planning future team activities. Some organizations have used the 360 format for team discussions

about teamwork, rather than for formal evaluation of individuals. A facilitated discussion can allow for open evaluation of the strengths and

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 171

weaknesses of the team, often revealing individual needs for train ing, coaching, or behavior modification. The 360 process can also encourage teamwork if the subject gathers

the raters together to share the action plan that was developed from the 360 results. By articulating personal goals, the subject invites the entire group to work as a team to assist the subject in personal devel opment.

23. SHOULD A 360 BE USED WITH THE EXISTING PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM?

A 360 can enhance a performance appraisal system by providing more detailed and tailored information. However, it can also be cum - bersome to try to keep up-to-date on performance appraisals while car- rying out a 360 assessment program. Both systems not only require the process of gathering information and completing paperwork (or elec- tronic forms), but also require time to meet with employees to go over the results and create plans of action. It is important for an organization to decide if the 360 will be the

sole performance appraisal system, or whether it will supplement the existing appraisal system. If it will be used as the sole appraisal system, then employees must have the opportunity to respond to results and work together with supervisors to create a plan of action. If the 360 is directly connected to compensation, the role of the

raters changes. They are now determining the salaries of the subject. As one peer rater stated, “I can’t fill this out honestly because I don’t want to be responsible for someone’s paycheck.” Since 360s are rec - ommended as developmental tools, they are not always as effective if raises are linked to results. Employees may resent the fact that their future depends upon their colleagues, and not on their boss, because they are used to working to please their supervisors. In some cases, a 360 is administered after a performance appraisal,

when an employee desires to know more about his or her work per - formance, or when the organization needs a way to gather feedback from a variety of sources so that it can create a broader picture of employee performance. A 360 can also be used in conjunction with employee and customer

satisfaction surveys, employee feedback sessions, and so forth, in order to obtain a general sense of organizational success and skill areas that require improvement.

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision172

Note that Chapter 4: “The Truth About Performance Appraisals,” discusses how supervisors should conduct the performance appraisal meeting and results of the 360 assessments.

24. CAN 360s BE USED IN A UNION ENVIRONMENT?

The relationship between management and labor will be a major influence on the success of a new appraisal process such as the 360 assessment. Past history, the style and credibility of management and union leadership, and the status of negotiations will all be major fac tors in determining whether the 360 can be implemented effectively. In some cases, the method of appraisal is specified in labor agree -

ments and contracts. If the organization includes union groups, it is important to: • Review labor-management agreements to determine the processes

of appraisal, the steps for changing appraisal methods, the level of involvement of union representatives in appraisal systems, and griev - ance procedures tied to employee appraisals. • Involve union representatives in designing and implementing the 360

process, establishing the parameters of union/management deci sion- making before beginning the process. • Review the grievance procedure process with the 360 assessment

in mind, recognizing that more than two people (supervisor and employee) will be involved in the assessment process. How will dis - agreements about the 360 results be settled? Who will be involved in mediating? What will be the procedure and time frame for filing com - plaints? • Recognize that seniority, gain-sharing, promotions, job assign -

ments, and access to skill-training are often union-based concerns and should be considered when determining how to use the results of the 360s.

25. HOW CAN A 360 CULTIVATE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE BOSS?

It depends upon the boss. It also depends upon the receptivity of the subject.

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 173

The 360 process can be conducted quite smoothly and then com - pletely fall apart when it comes time for the subject to discuss the results with the supervisor. If the supervisor uses the 360 as an excuse to criticize and demand,

then the purpose of the 360 as a developmental tool is lost. On the other hand, if the subject insists on debating and rejecting the 360 results, then the purpose of gathering multiple perspectives is lost. The 360 can be an excellent tool for cultivating good boss–subject

relationships if the boss:

• understands the purpose of the 360 as a developmental tool • completes training in how to conduct a performance assessment meeting • reads and highlights the appraisal results • identifies strong areas that should be encouraged and praised • identifies areas of development that can only be clarified with a thorough discussion • recognizes that scores that are “outliers” may be significant because they represent the truth, or because they represent a biased rater. (Individual score results, as well as total results, should be discussed with the subject.) • conducts an open discussion that involves more listening than talking • comes to agreement with the subject about skill areas that should be maintained and skill areas that need attention • specifies action plan objectives, and is willing to provide resources to assist the subject in improving behaviors.

The subject’s primary responsibility is to be willing to learn. An open-minded subject should study the 360 results, weigh the findings and think about the context and the messages, prepare for a plan- oriented session with the supervisor, and follow through. This is help- ful to the subject, and will probably impress the boss!

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision174

26. WHAT ARE THE WORST REASONS FOR IMPLEMENTING A 360?

The 360 assessment process should not be used to:

• build documentation on one individual solely for discipline or ter - mination • identify targets for downsizing • gather data without providing follow-up or support for subjects • stockpile ammunition.

The 360 is to help employees, not punish them.

27. WHO OWNS THE RESULTS?

Before implementing a 360° assessment process, determine where the final copies will be housed, who will have access to the files, how long they will be retained, and how long they will remain confidential and secure. Determine if participation in the process is required, including

whether subjects must develop action plans that identify areas of per - sonal development. What if a rater refuses to complete a form because they do not want a written record of their evaluation of a boss or co- worker (even if it is done anonymously)? Some organizations keep the results in individualized personnel

files, treating the final copies as a formal appraisal, owned by the orga - nization (with a copy to the subject). If the organization requests that the 360 be signed by the subject, it is important to determine if sign ing the copy indicates simply that it has been read, or whether the sub ject has read it and agrees with the contents. Since the 360 results are meant to serve as a resource for creating a

plan for personal development, it is a good idea to discuss the results and create an action plan that is signed by the subject and supervisor. The actual 360 report would then belong to the subject.

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 175

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision176

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About 360º Assessments 177

co py ri gh t la w.

The Truth About Supervision178

co py ri gh t la w.