News & Musings

Click here for archived News & Musings

6th May, 2008
So what do your colleagues think about you?

In the work that we do with businesses as consultants in the areas of leadership development and intentional change management, we have noticed, that particularly with medium and large organisations and even with smaller outfits there is a huge emphasis put on "personality profiling” and the results of employee questionnaires, at the interview stage, during employment and even, amazingly enough, sometimes upon termination by redundancy or unfair dismissal!

I will deal with the subject of personality profiling perhaps in another article but now I would like to turn to the question of the famous or even infamous 360° feedback. As I will be referring to individuals on a number of occasions I will simply use the feminine she or her or herself which is representative of both feminine and masculine

What is 360-degree feedback?

It is a process whereby an individual is rated on her performance by people who generally have interaction with the individual and some knowledge about the individual's work. This can include people who report directly to the individual, supervisors, peers, managers, customers or clients; in fact anybody who is credible to the individual and is familiar with the individual's work can be included in the feedback process.

The individual usually completes a self-assessment exercise on her performance, which is also used in the process. In simple terms it is an exercise in which one would hope the individual has an opportunity to look at how she is viewed from all sides by those with whom she is connected in the work environment. Hence the term 360°

So why do we use 360° feedback?

Using 360-degree feedback can bring the following individual and organisational benefits.

1. It provides the individual with an opportunity to learn how different colleagues perceive her which has the possibility (rather than the probability) of leading to, the increase of self-awareness.
2. It (can) increase the understanding of the types of behaviours that may be needed to improve personal and organisational effectiveness.
3. It encourages self-development.
4. It promotes a more open culture where giving and receiving feedback is an accepted norm.
5. It increases communication within the organisation.
6. It can be a powerful trigger for change.

The question is, does it actually work?

Well clearly, it is not merely the questions that are asked but the manner in which they are asked and the appropriate environment existing within the organisation at the time which is of fundamental importance. I would suggest, that the following matters have to be considered before starting such a process:

Purpose
It is important that people are clear about why this process is being used and what it is being used for. The purpose needs to be clearly and consistently communicated to all those involved.

Culture
You need to consider whether the culture within the organisation is actually supportive of this process and allows open feedback. If the organisation, does not encourage open feedback and there is a "culture of suspicion", then the process is highly likely to be unsuccessful and will be equally viewed with suspicion. The 360-degree feedback process relies heavily on the input of others, so Subjects (the individuals who are the subject of the questionnaire) and Raters (the individuals who are giving feedback about the Subjects) need to feel comfortable and supported when taking part in this process.

Timing
Identifying when to introduce 360-degree feedback is an important consideration. It may not be appropriate to introduce it during periods of downturn or when redundancies or re-organisations have been announced. During these periods staff are more likely to be feeling threatened and concerned about the organisation's intentions and therefore resistant to new feedback processes. However, the other argument is that by offering the process during this period, the feedback will reveal certain fears and hopes that will make the process perhaps even more "real" than it would have been when everything is "hunky-dory".

Endorsement
It may be useful to have a director or partner or at least a senior manager in the organisation being seen to advocate the entire process and display enthusiasm which can of course be contagious. This can greatly enhance its success and generate buy-in to the process. It is also important to involve staff as early as possible in the implementation of 360-degree feedback as it prevents secrecy and the feeling that this has been imposed on them.

Cnfidentiality
It is important to guarantee confidentiality for participants – both Subjects and Raters. Make sure the model you are using ensures this happens so that the feedback is not attributable to individual Raters.

The Struggle

The struggle that we have had recently comes in the small print under the end of the heading "Confidentiality". For many individuals to feel safe in giving open feedback they have to be confident that their feedback cannot be directly attributable to them, so that they will feel protected in their anonymity. If you think about it, it is a little strange, on the one hand to be encouraging full and frank discussion and open questionnaires when on the other hand we have to work so hard to preserve anonymity because otherwise Raters may have concerns that such feedback may adversely affect the existing relationship with the Subject!

So, perceived problems seem to me, to include the following: --

Raters

1. There may be fear that even though answers are supposed to be anonymous it will be possible for the Subject to identify the Raters by the answers she may give.  This often results in anodyne answers avoiding saying anything that may be perceived "nasty" about the Subject. Indeed, Raters can be extremely imaginative in this area. Even a question such as "name the five areas in which the Subject could obtain improvement in (a specified project) elicits replies such as "cannot see room for improvement" to "she could make her staff coffee every morning.!" Evasion seems to be the name of the game.
   
   
2. Often Raters adopt the attitude that if you cannot say something nice about someone then do not say anything at all. Answers lack substance.
   
   
3. Raters, can feel flattered to be asked to be involved in the project and therefore are complimentary as a way of misconceived reciprocity, however clear the administrator may be about the reasons for the process and the need for honesty and candour.
   
   
4. Most people are really only observant of themselves and those to whom they are really close. Therefore, a Rater may in fact not have much to say at all about the Subject and rather than reveal a perceived lack of observation and self obsession, will supply instead, an answer for the sake of it rather than say nothing which is of little use.
   
   
5. Raters who are peers,(and indeed others) may be themselves insecure about their own positions and will refrain from being complimentary because they perceive the Subject as a "rival", thus leading to inaccuracies.
   
   
6. There may be simply no buy-in into the process by the Raters and therefore the replies given are either self-serving or completely disinterested.
   
   
7. If a Rater has a personal issue with the Subject, she may often not come right out and say this, but disguise answers in a way that may seek to discredit the Subject. A good administrator of the process should be able to perceive this.

Subject

1. The Subject may be a very sensitive individual and perceived negative feedback may have a very harming effect on the individual's ability to continue to function and interreact with the perceived providers of the negative feedback.
   
   
2. It will have to be an extremely powerful process and involve some deft work by the administrator for the Subject not to merely allow the results to reinforce everything that the Subject always thought about herself. This problem can manifest itself in a number of ways including :-
   
   • if the Subject receives a lot of complimentary feedback, and she already believes these things about herself and has some low self esteem issues, she will be unwilling or more particularly psychologically unable to take in the praise and only "negative stuff" will resonate with the subject.
     
   • If there are a number of similar "negative" comments, I have experienced individuals who believe or at least say that they believe, that the Raters are “ganging up" on them and the subject become unwilling to further engage in the process in any meaningful way.
     
     
3. The Subject may agree before the process begins that she has complete "buy-in" and will at least look at what is said, but in reality when the results are known and available and presented (if insensitively) to the subject, she may experience some trauma arising from my first point above and the experience of the administrator in dealing with this will be vital.

So how, can we do our level best to make the best use of the 360° feedback process?

1. One must get buy-in from all the individuals involved. Indeed, I would get written confirmation from the Raters that they fully understand the reasons why this is being done and they will exercise full honesty and candour and creativity in supporting the subject from getting the best from the exercise. I would also obtain an acknowledgement from them that anything less than this would be failing the subject and the process.
2. I strongly believe that this process cannot be carried out in an organisation in isolation, where there is not a general culture of open feedback. If there is any doubt about this I would either advise that the process is inappropriate. Alternatively I would carry out some team exercises within an agreed timescale to move towards a more open exchange of views and an acknowledgement that clear and clean conflict and trust is beneficial within the organisation.
3. Be imaginative with the 360° questionnaire and creative with the questions in an attempt to elicit more useful and supportive responses. Try and avoid closed questions, i.e. questions that require “yes or no" answers.
4. Before starting formally acknowledge to the Subject, the courage and openness she is demonstrating in being prepared to hear the views of others and (if the questionnaire is being carried out by e-mail or via the web or in writing) make sure the Raters are also aware of the courage being demonstrated by the Subject and that such courage demands that they take their responsibilities seriously. I use the term courage and this is precisely what I mean. I believe that courage only exists in the presence of fear and one of the greatest fears of most people is that if they were to hear the views of others it may shatter the carefully constructed (and often very fragile) beliefs that they have about themselves. I cannot overemphasise the psychological importance of this. Friedrich Nietzsche believed that when we are "alone and quiet we fear that something will be whispered in our ear".
5. Having regard to 4 above, if you are administering the process ensure that the results are fed to the Subject in a way that preserves anonymity of the Raters and thus complies with your agreement with them. Be open and aware of any reaction of the Subject and remain open and willing to facilitate her in a positive way around her reaction and if you do not feel capable of doing this then take advice and support from HR if available.
6. Ensure that the Subject is monitored for an agreed time period after she has received the results of the 360° feedback questionnaire as there may be an emotional reaction which should be reviewed.

In summary, I believe the 360° feedback process has a great deal to recommend it but there needs to be more imagination exercised around the questionnaire itself and a greater emphasis on the psychological welfare of the individuals involved than I often see demonstrated.

I am working on some cracking new questionnaires, so watch this space…….

Musings by David Salamons 6th May 2008.