The 360-degree feedback system, alternatively referred to as the multi-source assessment refers to a process whereby a person’s performance is measured through feedback from different people (Armstrong, 2015). The sources of this feedback include customers, colleagues, subordinates, and the immediate manager. Assessments are conducted in the form of ratings based on numerous performance indicators. In this system, feedback is presented directly to the individual, the manager or sometimes to both. The purpose of this assignment is to assess the benefits of the 360-degree feedback system including its impact on leadership perspectives. Further, the paper includes empirical assessment that challenges feedback system as well as an analysis of the current and potential sources of information of the system.
The Advantages of The 360-Degree Feedback System
A significant advantage of the 360-degree feedback approach is that it furnishes an opportunity for persons whom an employee frequently interacts with to provide feedback (Das & Panda, 2017). This consideration is essential because the rater must be someone who has associated and observed an employee frequently. It would be unreasonable to ask someone to rate when an opportunity to assess the employee’s abilities, skills, and talents has never been given.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The human resource management system is rooted in the concepts of performance appraisal and feedback (Armstrong, 2015). Appraisal and feedback enable managers to evaluate employee performance and offer them feedback. In turn, this allows employees to reflect on their performance and then brainstorm how to improve in the future. The 360-degree feedback approach encourages people from different perspectives to evaluate and provide feedback on someone’s performance. Though a manager can conduct a self-appraisal, this approach enables him to receive feedback from subordinates, clients, customers, superiors, and peers.
Other advantages of this appraisal system include the fact that the company can obtain diverse perspectives regarding a given employee. Importantly, those who closely interact with the individual will provide feedback on the overall performance. Also, this technique is valuable in terms of fulfilling customer needs (Sonnentag, 2002). Sometimes, organizational members are likely to lose focus on the customer’s perspectives. In such cases, the 360-degree technique brings back the customer’s points of view into the larger picture.
The Impact of 360-Degree Feedback on Leadership Style
The key to a successful business, project or organization is an effective leadership style. Considering that leadership style is critical to an organization’s growth, it is crucial to cultivate the appropriate leadership approach. According to Armstrong (2015), the 360-degree feedback system is among the most efficient techniques for leadership development. In a recent survey performed by Linkage Inc on 350 firms, the 360 feedback emerged as the second most vital aspect, which influenced the success of leadership development and approach.
This appraisal tool is instrumental in helping leaders and managers to choose a more effective leadership style. Sometimes, it becomes challenging for supervisors and managers to assess the effectiveness of a leader’s interaction with others. However, for one to be an effective leader, an organization must pursue a 360-degree feedback view. Each group of individuals that the leader comes into contact with on a regular basis is affected in different ways. Leaders can take the varied and broad insights and feedback from many various sources and apply it to their practices and behavior, pursue training where necessary, and use it to nurture the appropriate leadership style (Mustafa et al. 2018).
Also, leaders can use this feedback to analyze the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of different leadership styles. Based on this analysis, they can choose the best technique for the organization. Further, this appraisal tool encourages subordinates to contribute their opinions regarding numerous aspects of the leader’s practices, which in turn makes one a better leader (Sonnentag, 2002). This assessment helps highlight which leadership style is working and which one is not. When the feedback is supported by training, this tool is a substantial addition to an organization’s performance management structure.
Empirical Examination That Challenges The 360-Degree Feedback System
Although, when implemented correctly a 360-degree performance assessment can be advantageous for organizations, some empirical examinations challenge this very same model. Some scholars claim that a complete 360-feedback process takes more time than projected and could be more detailed than anticipated. In this view, it is recommended that companies that chose to follow a 360-degree feedback must consider the time factor and be prepared to wait for the results. Sonnentag (2002) suggests that it is essential for an organization to have an estimate regarding the time frame of the entire process. It is agreed that the implementation of this system takes more time compared to other assessments. For example, companies always overlook the costs of manager’s and employee’s time to respond to results. In itself, this leads to decreased employee productivity. Though the system can make it mandatory for customers to give feedback, they may lack the time to do so.
Nevertheless, going by the available statistics, almost all Fortune 1000 companies are currently using the 360-degree feedback approach to performance appraisal and many more are in the process of shifting towards this approach. Actually, majority of the large companies such as Accenture, Adobe and Microsoft have already replaced manager to team member evaluation method by 360-degree feedback. Also, considering the diversity and type of the feedback collected, this approach may not be seen as being time consuming (Das & Panda, 2017).
Other studies define the reliability and validity of the 360-degree evaluation method as problematic. For instance, it is widely advocated that a greater variety and number of feedback sources mean higher objectivity and fairness. But, Eckert et al. (2010) declare that it is difficult to support the notion that, because the 360-degree evaluation method involves numerous sources compared to other appraisal methods, it is automatically more accurate and objective. Apart from feedback from someone’s peers, inter-rating is associated with weaker trustworthiness (Mustafa et al. 2018). Moreover, the outcome of an evaluation that is based on the principle of scratch my back, I scratch yours, cannot be a valid performance indicator. Such erroneous reviews can either cause an organization to under/overcompensate its employees or create the wrong employee development plans.
Another group of researchers claims that not only the time element but also the costs of the 360 feedback practice is a significant point that organizations must consider before adopting (Eckert et al. 2010). Practices that render this approach costly include designing and communicating the process; training managers and supervisors for the practice; buying 360-degree feedback software, piloting costs and buying multi-rater feedback consulting services, among many others.
Sources of Information Within 360-Degree Feedback
According to Swanson et al. (2010), most organizations have incorporated the concept of upward feedback into the 360-degree performance evaluation, which collects employee information from various sources and gives a rich perspective regarding the employee’s performance. Multiple sources from different levels within an organization provide information about someone. This enables an organization to obtain a more complete and accurate picture of a team or individual performance. In a 360-degree feedback system, performance information is generated from the person to whom a personalized report to, their peers, colleagues in any part of the organization, as well as internal and external customers.
Gregory et al. (2017) argue that the 360-degree feedback evaluation approach requires bosses, customers, peers, and subordinates to provide feedback to managers regarding someone’s performance. Within the organizational hierarchy, the feedback about someone’s activities would derive from managers, subordinates, peers, and self-assessments. In some cases, it would come from external sources like suppliers, customers or other relevant stakeholders. This multi-source feedback enables employees to understand how other members view their effectiveness and become aware of how their effectiveness as an employee, individual and co-worker is perceived within the organization. Das & Panda (2017) agree that employee performance data must be gathered from at least three source groups. Therefore, the multiple sources of information about someone’s performance render the 360-degree feedback as one of the most accurate employee evaluation mechanisms.
Support for the success of this approach is readily available in psychological, human resource and management journals, including the published works of subject matter in the leadership development domain. The main strength of the 360-degree feedback lies in the multiple sources of performance information and the fact that these numerous sources offer interestingly differing viewpoints. Conclusively, the 360-degree feedback assessments are valuable because they provide a balanced and well-rounded perspective of an individual’s behaviors and skills. In this approach, feedback is not only obtained from an individual’s immediate supervisor but different people within the organization. This furnishes a more accurate and fair picture of employees’ demonstrated performance and behavior.
References
Armstrong, M. (2015). Armstrong's handbook of performance management: An evidence-based guide to delivering high performance . London, United Kingdom: Kogan Page.
Das, U. K., & Panda, J. (January 01, 2017). The Impact of 360 Degree Feedback on Employee Role in Leadership Development. Asian Journal of Management, 8, 4, 962.
Eckert, R., Ekelund, B. Z., Gentry, W. A., & Dawson, J. F. (June 01, 2010). “ I don't see me like you see me, but is that a problem? ” Cultural influences on rating discrepancy in 360-degree feedback instruments. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19, 3, 259-278.
Gregory, P. J., Robbins, B., Schwaitzberg, S. D., & Harmon, L. (September 01, 2017). Leadership development in a professional medical society using 360-degree survey feedback to assess emotional intelligence. Surgical Endoscopy : and Other Interventional Techniquesofficial Journal of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (sages) and European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (eaes), 31, 9, 3565-3573.
Mustafa G., İsmail K., & Burak V. (January 01, 2018). 360-Degree Performance Appraisal and Feedback System: A Study with Heads of Departments in C ̧ anakkale Onsekiz Mart University. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 17, 4, 1425-1437.
Sonnentag, S. (2002). Psychological management of individual performance . Chichester: Wiley.
Swanson, J. A., Antonoff, M. B., Dennis, L., Martodam, B. S. W., Schmitz, C. C., D'Cunha, J., & Maddaus, M. A. (September 01, 2010). Surgical leadership development: Identification of discrepancies in self-awareness using a customized 360-degree feedback assessment. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 211, 3.)
