360 ° feedback

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 360 ° feedback (also: 360-degree feedback, survey, assessment or multi-rater feedback ) is a method for assessing the skills and performance of specialists and managers from different perspectives, such as from the point of view of Employees, superiors, colleagues, team members or customers. Findings about the effect of 360-degree feedback on changes in behavior and the performance of the people being assessed vary from negative to neutral to positive. The way in which the results are reported to the feedback recipients and the validity and reliability of the questionnaire are decisive for success .

method

The 360-degree feedback at a glance

The assessment of the skills and performance of individual specialists and managers is a sensitive problem because the financial, personal and professional future can depend on it. As the division of labor increases, however, it becomes more and more difficult for a single person to make a reasonably objective assessment of the work results and the behavior of others. Traditional methods therefore usually fall short.

The greater objectivity of this method is due to the fact that a person evaluates himself (self-image) and is simultaneously observed and assessed from different perspectives. The feedback providers thus contribute to the external image. This group of people includes supervisors, colleagues, employees, customers, and suppliers. By comparing the self-image and the image of others, a very realistic assessment of the performance and behavior of the feedback recipient results. From the analysis of strengths and weaknesses, very concrete and practical learning and improvement opportunities can be derived.

The survey is mostly anonymous, with the result that the answers are much more honest. These aspects (more objectivity, anonymity and honesty) have contributed to the fact that 360-degree feedback has now become one of the most important instruments for management development worldwide. This is especially true for the effective development of leadership skills .

history

The origin of the 360-degree feedback lies with the Wehrmacht , where it was used as a forerunner of today's assessment center , the so-called round - table discussion , for the selection of officer candidates (as early as 1930). Among other things, it turned out that the opinion of the comrades could predict the probation at the front better than different test results (predictive validity ).

The behavior at the round table, which each applicant took over, was only one source of the behavioral evaluation. In addition, there was the assessment by senior officers and psychologists, personality tests and outdoor training sessions in which the officer cadets were supposed to build a bridge over a river with the help of a rope, for example. Among other things, dexterity, body control, endurance, energy, commitment, ingenuity and community behavior were observed. So the candidate got an assessment of his ability, character and behavior from various sources. This is called “ multi-rater feedback ” today . Such methods were far superior to officer selection procedures in other armed forces.

In 1969, Thompson examined the practice of performance evaluation in some technology companies and found that the then common practices were often viewed as unfair, frustrating, or even cynical. In addition, they have rarely fulfilled their actual purpose, namely to realistically assess the contribution of each individual to the company's success and to promote motivation .

Later, in the 1980s, 360-degree feedback was increasingly used in many companies in the United States for performance evaluation. The term 360-degree feedback is an unprotected name for the process described above.

Current discussion

One of the first publications in the specialist literature on this subject was by Nowack in 1993. The works by Levinson from 1976 (“Upward Appraisal”) or by Clark Wilson from 1980 (Multi-Level Management Survey) count. Since then, around 290 publications per year (average over the past five years) have appeared in the German and English-language business press ( LexisNexis database).

Empirical studies have shown that 360-degree feedback does not automatically contribute to the success of managerial development (e.g. changing behavior or improving skills). That can have several reasons. On the one hand, there can be acceptance problems, especially if the results are negative for the person being assessed. On the other hand, the assessed manager may lack the insight, will and readiness to change their behavior. And thirdly, it is possible that the executive assessed does not see any advantages in implementing the results of the 360-degree assessment. Therefore, some conditions must be met. This includes specific development measures such as training, coaching and the linking of the results with personal and business or organizational goals and key figures (personality and company development), for example as part of a performance and potential assessment.

General statements about the efficiency of 360-degree feedback are difficult because there is now a large variety of variants, methods and uses, so that one cannot even speak of “the” 360-degree feedback. And like any other instrument, it can be used more or less professionally. The practical benefit of the results therefore does not depend primarily on the instrument, but on the quality ( validity and reliability ) of the questionnaire and thus the qualifications of the people who use it.

Application in practice (success factors)

360 degree feedback - what matters (success factors)

Edward Prewitt can summarize the following success factors for the practical implementation of a 360-degree feedback (see also the graphic opposite):

  • One should not start with the performance evaluation, but with the personal development - or at least separate both, because the instrument can trigger fears in many affected people if they are not used to dealing with it.
  • One should start with a small, manageable department that seems suitable for such an approach (for example, if there is an open climate because it involves a cultural change). Because only a sufficient basis of trust between the parties involved ensures reliable and meaningful data.
  • It's not about coming to terms with the past or “judging” employees, but rather about realizing clear company goals that are understandable for everyone.
  • The introduction requires extensive training of all those concerned, in particular how to deal with the questionnaires used.
  • The reports, which are usually created automatically in the form of statistical evaluations, must be explained, integrated into the personal development plan and coordinated with the manager.
  • 360-degree feedback should not be introduced in times of crisis, such as layoffs or restructuring.

It is important to follow these recommendations for the benefits and uses of 360 feedback to take effect. In addition, you should pay attention to certain prerequisites for success, otherwise there is a great risk that the disadvantages will outweigh. Figure 2 tries to illustrate this (conclusion).

Requirements for the questionnaire

In principle, the same quality criteria ( validity and reliability ) apply to the questionnaire as to any other data collection . The most important requirements can be summarized in the following suggestions: The competencies ascertained with the questionnaire should be derived from the goals of the company or organization. This increases the acceptance of the 360-degree feedback both among the decision-makers (usually line managers ) and among the participants, because it shows how each individual can make a contribution to the company's success.

It is also important that competencies with specific behavioral descriptions (and not leadership styles , personality traits or motives ) are recorded in the questionnaire. For example, a study by Albert Bandura ( Stanford University ) has shown that there is virtually no correlation between achievement motive ( measured by tests) and actual performance; and a strong motive for power or dominance says little about whether someone can use power responsibly.

The survey of personality traits and leadership styles is also very problematic. These constructs have the lowest informative value (prognostic validity) when it comes to changing future behavior, i.e. possible learning successes. A major reason: (Successful) leadership styles, for example those of the popular theory of situational leadership that have been observed in other people (in the past), can usually not be transferred to other people. If you wanted to learn (imitate) them, authentic behavior is hardly possible. And in the case of personality traits, it's a pragmatic aspect: changing a person's personality is much more difficult (if not impossible) compared to changing behavior. Conclusion: The questionnaire should not collect abstract styles, motives or character traits, but rather competencies related to the concrete tasks, such as management or leadership competencies .

supporting documents

  1. ↑ Synthesis from: R. Lepsinger, AD Lucia: The Art and Science of 360 Degree Feedback . San Francisco 2009; B. de Villiers: 7 Principles of highly effective managerial feedback: Theory and practice in managerial development interventions. In: The International Journal of Management Education. 11, 2013, pp. 66-74; M. Alexandruam, M. Dianab: Management skills assessment using 360 ° feedback - MSF 360. In: Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 187, 2015, pp. 318-323; C. Bailey, M. Austin: 360 Degree Feedback and Developmental Outcomes: The Role of Feedback Characteristics, Self-Efficacy and Importance of Feedback Dimensions to Focal Managers' Current Role. In: International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 14/1, 2006, pp. 51-66; W. Pelz: The 360-degree feedback for the recognition and development of high potentials. In: J. Sauer, A. Cisik (Ed.): In Germany, the wrong ones lead. How companies have to change. Helios Media, Berlin 2014. (online)
  2. ↑ Horst Steinmann, Georg Schreyögg: Management. 6th edition. Wiesbaden 2005, p. 817 ff.
  3. ^ PH Thompson, GW Dalton: Performance appraisal: Managers beware. In: Harvard Business Review. January-February 1970.
  4. ↑ R. Lepsinger, D. Lucia: The art and science of 360 degree feedback. 2nd Edition. San Francisco 2009.
  5. ↑ J. Fleenor, F. Prince: Using 360-degree feedback in organizations. Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro 1997, p. 51.
  6. ^ P. Hofstätter: Group dynamics. Hamburg 1971, p. 153.
  7. ↑ Peter Hofstätter et al.: Deutsche Wehrmachtpsychologie 1914-1945. Munich 1985, p. 236 ff. See also: Foreigen Military Studies. Historical Division, HQ Europe, US Army, Europe, Personnel Administration Part V, 1948.
  8. ↑ Target question: Psychological selection methods in the armies of foreign countries. In: Soldierentum. 5th year, Berlin 1938 - quoted n. Hofstätter
  9. ^ M. Carson: Saying it like it isn't: The pros and cons of 360-degree feedback. In: Business Horizons. 2006, p. 49.
  10. ↑ KM Nowack: 360-degree feedback: The whole story, training and development. January 1993.
  11. ^ H. Levinson: Appraisal of what performance? In: Harvard Business Review. July-August 1976.
  12. ^ CL Wilson: Assessing management and od needs. In: Training and Development Journal. April 1980.
  13. ↑ for a detailed discussion of the empirical studies see Gary Yukl: Leadership in Organizations. 8th edition. Pearson 2013, p. 372 ff.
  14. ↑ D. Tourish, P. Robson: Sensemaking and the distortion of critical upward communication in organizations. In: Journal of Management Studies. vol. 43, Issue 4, 2006.
  15. ↑ MA Peiperl: Getting 360 ° feedback right. In: Harvard Business Review. January 2001.
  16. ^ E. Prewitt: Should you use 360 ​​° feedback for performance reviews? In: Harvard Management Update. February 1999.
  17. ^ E. Collins: 360 ° mentoring. In: Harvard Management Update. March 2008.
  18. ↑ Waldemar Pelz: The 360-degree feedback: popular, effective and objective - what is useful in assessing competencies and where the traps lurk. In: HR Today Special. 4/2011.
  19. ^ A. Bandura: Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. In: Organizational behavior and human decision process. 50, 1991.
  20. ↑ Justin Menkes: Executive Intelligence. New York 2005, pp. 145 ff.
  21. ^ G. Thompson, RP Vecchio: Situational leadership theory: A test ot three versions. In: The Leadership Quarterly. 20, 2009, p. 845 f.
  22. ↑ Waldemar Pelz: The 360-degree feedback: popular, effective and objective - what is useful in assessing competencies and where the traps lurk. In: HR Today Special. 4/2011, p. 29 f.

literature

  • Mary Carson: Saying it like it isn't: The pros and cons of 360-degree feedback. In: Business Horizons. Vol. 46, 2006, ISSN  0007-6813 , pp. 395-402, doi: 10.1016 / j.bushor.2006.01.004 .
  • Elizabeth Collins: 360 ° mentoring. In: Harvard Management Update. March 2008, pp. 3–4, ZDB -ID 2070382-X , online (PDF; 501 kB) .
  • Christian Dries, Barbara Meier, Lutz Hecht: Managers need honesty. MediCircle®: 360-degree feedback in healthcare. In: managing and managing the hospital. Volume 19, No. 6, 2002, pp. 614-616.
  • Mark R. Edwards, Ann J. Ewen: 360 ° feedback. The powerful new model for employee assessment & performance improvement. AMACOM, New York NY et al. 1996, ISBN 0-8144-0326-3 .
  • John W. Fleenor, Jeffrey Michael Prince: Using 360-degree feedback in organizations. An annotated bibliography. Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro NC 1997, ISBN 1-882197-33-X .
  • Joy Fisher Hazucha, Sarah A. Hezlett, Robert J. Schneider: The impact of 360-degree feedback on management skills development. In: Human Resource Management. Vol. 32, No. 2/3, 1993, ISSN  0090-4848 , pp. 325-351, doi: 10.1002 / hrm . 3930320210 .
  • Peter R. Hofstätter : Group dynamics. Critique of mass psychology (= Rowohlt's German Encyclopedia 38 Psychology ). Revised and expanded new edition. Rowohlt, Reinbek near Hamburg 1971, ISBN 3-499-55038-5 .
  • Richard Lepsinger, Antoinette D. Lucia: The art and science of 360 degree feedback. 2nd Edition. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco CA 2009, ISBN 978-0-470-33189-7 .
  • Harry Levinson: Appraisal of what performance? In: Harvard Business Review. Vol. 54, No. 4, July-August 1976, ISSN  0017-8012 , pp. 30-46.
  • Fred Luthans, Suzanne J. Peterson: 360-degree feedback with systematic coaching: Empirical analysis suggests a winning combination. In: Human Resource Management. Vol. 42, No. 3, 2003, pp. 243-256.
  • Kenneth M. Nowack: 360-degree feedback: The whole story. In: Training & Development. Vol. 47, No. 1, January 1993, ISSN  1535-7740 , pp. 69-72.
  • Edward Prewitt: Should You Use 360-Degree Feedback for Performance Reviews? In: Harvard Management Update. February 1999, pp. 3-4.
  • Maury A. Peiperl: Getting 360 ° feedback right. In: Harvard Business Review. Vol. 79, No. 1, January 2001, pp. 142-147.
  • Waldemar Pelz: The 360-degree feedback - popular, effective and objective. In: HR Today Special. Volume 4, 2011, ISSN  1663-2346 , pp. 29-31, (online; PDF; 516 kB) .
  • Martin Scherm: 360 degree assessments: Diagnosis and development of leadership skills. In: Martin Scherm (Ed.): 360 degree assessments. Diagnosis and development of leadership skills (= psychology for personnel management. Volume 24). Hogrefe, Göttingen et al. 2005, ISBN 3-8017-1406-3 , pp. V – VII, (online; PDF; 138 kB) .
  • Martin Scherm: 360 degree assessment. In: Jürgen Bengel, Matthias Jerusalem (Hrsg.): Handbuch der Psychologie. Volume 6: Heinz Schuler , Karlheinz Sonntag (Hrsg.): Manual of work and organizational psychology. Hogrefe, Göttingen et al. 2007, ISBN 978-3-8017-1849-7 , pp. 555-560.
  • Martin Scherm: 360 degree assessments. In: Werner Sarges (Hrsg.): Management Diagnostik. 4th, completely revised u. exp. Edition. Hogrefe, Göttingen et al. 2013, ISBN 978-3-8017-2385-9 , pp. 864–872.
  • Martin Scherm: Foreign judgments. In: Werner Sarges (Hrsg.): Management Diagnostik. 4th, completely revised u. exp. Edition. Hogrefe, Göttingen et al. 2013, ISBN 978-3-8017-2385-9 , pp. 734-741.
  • Martin Scherm: Competence feedback - self and external assessment of professional behavior. Hogrefe, Göttingen et al. 2014, ISBN 978-3-8017-2455-9 .
  • Martin Scherm, Werner Sarges : 360 ° Feedback (= Practice of Personal Psychology. Volume 1; 2nd revised and expanded edition). Hogrefe, Göttingen et al. 2019, ISBN 978-3-8017-3000-0 .
  • James W. Smither, Manuel London, Richard R Reilly: Does performance improve following multisource feedback? A theoretical model, meta-analysis, and review of empirical findings. In: Personnel Psychology. Vol. 58, No. 1, 2005, ISSN  0031-5826 , pp. 33-66, doi : 10.1111 / j.1744-6570.2005.514_1.x .
  • James W. Smither, Manuel London, Raymond Flautt, Yvette Vargas, Ivy Kucine: Can working with an executive coach improve multisource feedback ratings over time? A quasi-experimental field study. In: Personnel Psychology. Vol. 56, No. 1, 2003, pp. 23-44, doi: 10.1111 / j.1744-6570.2003.tb00142.x .
  • Paul H. Thompson, Gene W. Dalton: Performance Appraisal: Managers Beware. In: Harvard Business Review. Vol. 48, No. 1, January-February 1970, pp. 149-157.
  • Dennis Tourish, Paul Robson: Sensemaking and the distortion of critical upward communication in organizations. In: Journal of Management Studies. Vol. 43, No. 4, 2006, ISSN  0022-2380 , pp. 711-730, doi: 10.1111 / j.1467-6486.2006.00608.x .
  • Clark L. Wilson: Assessing management and od needs. In: Training and Development Journal. Vol. 34, No. 4, April 1980, ISSN  0041-0861 , pp. 71-76.

Web links

  • THM Business School - consolidation of the aspect "validity and reliability of questionnaires"