slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Download Presentation


134 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript



  3. AGENDA • Introduction / overview • What is the 360 method? • Questions • How to do a 360 • Questions • Samples • Questions - Wrap-up

  4. Why we shouldn’t be surprised that this is a challenging issue- • How good are we at honest evaluation? Candid feedback? • In our homes? • In schools? • In relationships? • Politics? • Social organizations? • So why would we expect to be any better at work?

  5. Opinions range … • from, zero support for performance evaluations … to … traditional must-do annual evals • Not really in conflict – all opinions agree that feedback to employees is needed – HOW it is done makes the difference

  6. Continued … • Call it • Coaching – developmental feedback- • Constructive criticism – • Appreciation – appraisal – • What is needed is fair – regular – frequent enough to be effective – honest, positive when possible

  7. PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONSWhen done as a cooperative conversationbetween supervisor and employee

  8. Performance evals continued … • Provide a basis for coaching to improve employee performance • Assist in setting goals for employee development • Assist in making systematic judgments • Provide feedback to the employee from multiple sources • Assist in realigning the culture of a department or organization

  9. WHAT WORKS? • Mutual goal setting rather than criticism • Day to day coaching rather than “flu shot” • Participation by the employee (self evaluation, mutual development of process) = greater ownership • Setting specific goals which are better than vague or general ones • Ex: Vague: Improve customer service. Specific: Send out confirmation reports daily. • Include a time dimension for goals • Goals should be challenging but reachable

  10. WHAT DOESN’T WORK? • Straight criticism, especially without agreement on WHAT is important, or without examples • An evaluation that has poor credibility will = defensiveness • Direct tie to salary [surveys tell us $$ has little or short term impact]

  11. The 360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROCESSWhat is it? • NOTE: 360* [degree] feedback* is a registered trademark of TEAMS, Inc.

  12. The 360 – what is it? The 360 degree evaluation process provides information to an employee from multiple sources - a circle of stakeholders – peers – supervisor – direct reports – higher mg levels – internal customers – external customers – vendors – consultants –others = “360”.

  13. 1) Developmental purposes only. The information is gathered by neutral entity – not the supervisor – and shared only with the employee. OR 2) Evaluation. The supervisor is involved in designing, gathering information, and in communication with the employee. Two lines of thought: Use the 360 for

  14. CONSIDER THIS… • Because a good evaluation IS about development – if done correctly a 360 is good for both development and evaluation. • Because a good evaluation should focus on developing strengths a 360 can be a very good approach because the information gathered is from so many sources.

  15. IN MULTISOURCE EVALUATIONS - • Peers and direct reports: will see how things are going PLUS • Supervisor: will see what is being done = • The 360 provides a way to integrate the two views • Surveys show employees prefer multi-source feedback to supervisor only feedback Edwards & Ewen, pgs. 182-183

  16. PROS AND CONS RE THE 360 PROCESS from Jones & Bearley, pg. 11 • Shaver (1995, p. 13) points out that the 360° assessment helps people • uncover expectations, strengths, and weaknesses that are news to them… • broadens the perspective on evaluating an individual by using multiple data sources • provides ratings that can become benchmarks in the feedback recipient’s performance-evaluation process • may promote people becoming increasingly accountable for their own growth and development….

  17. PROS with credit to EDWARDS AND EWEN, pgs. 3 - 23 • Multisource feedback can get at issues the supervisor might miss • Peer opinion can change behavior • Multisource feedback is more diverse: As organizations diversify by gender, ethnicity, age, disability, race, etc., more pts of view are needed for accurate assessment [same principle can apply in using committees or teams in recruitment and selection]

  18. PROS with credit to EDWARDS AND EWEN, pgs. 3 - 23 • Can be tailored to the individual’s needs • In planning the 360 the supervisor and the employee can come to a clearer understanding of what each believes is important, which furthers the process of developing a common language within the department and the organization • The quiet high performer might not be getting noticed by the supervisor

  19. PROS with credit to EDWARDS AND EWEN, pgs. 3 - 23 • The choices regarding what is important to be appraised can be tied into an organization’s goals such as a need for change or new emphases such as safety, diversity, or creativity • Probably less costly than other methods, though that can depend – but contrast it to getting the evaluation wrong, or to mis-applied training costs • Involves many stakeholders, valuing their opinions is an important message about their importance [customers, vendors, unions]

  20. Interviews • The questions should be developed based on what has been identified as important. • Will the interviewer be trained and open-minded? • Who will process the results? Collins in Thin Book recommends: get examples of good work to illustrate the qualities you want to understand better

  21. Validity concerns: • Rater bias and fear can lead to inflation – raters are afraid to be truly candid • In a truly anonymous situation with good safeguards the fear is reduced and the bias of friends and enemies can cancel each other out as potential inflation and deflation. NOTE: Ratings are relative, open to interpretation. A “good”, doesn’t mean the same to everyone: but for most people there is internal consistency.

  22. COMMENTS ON FEEDBACK: • Examples are important, but don’t focus on the unusual unless the single event is unusual or very important. Look for patterns. • Critical incidents – a single event that is outstandingly good or bad, or very important for some reason. • THE OUTLIER FEEDBACK: There may be one interviewee who has very different responses from everyone else – the “outlier”. Don’t discount the outlier. The feedback of the outlier could be a signal of a new and important but so far uncommon quality, such as risk-taking. Or it could be a sign of concern.

  23. THESE ELEMENTS ARE CRITICAL : • Clarity about purpose & process • Trust - the MOST important element – runs through everything • Consistency in methodology • Dependable anonymity and safeguards

  24. FINAL IMPORTANT STEP: • Get feedback to the raters – important to maintain their trust in the process

  25. RESOURCES • Buckingham, Marcus and Donald O. Clifton, Ph.D., NOW, Discover Your Strengths, The Free Press, 2001 • Collins, Michelle LeDuff, Ph.D. The Thin Book of 360 Feedback: A Manager's Guide, Thin Book Publishing Co., 2000

  26. Edwards, Mark R. and Ann J. Ewen, 360 Degree Feedback: The Powerful New Model for Employee Assessment & Performance Improvement, amacom – American Management Association, 1996 • Jones, John E., Ph.D. and William L. Bearley, Ed.D., 360° Feedback : Strategies, Tactics, and Techniques for Developing Leaders, HRD Press & Lakewood Publications, 1996 • Peiperl, Maury A., Getting 360-Degree Feedback Right, Harvard Business Review, January 2001