360feedback-anewagenda

8/8/2019 360Feedback-ANewAgenda

1/18

The demand for greater bang for buck - more performance for less time and money - is proving a powerful discipline in rethinkingand repositioning 360 feedback in an

increasingly uncertain leadership world.

new directions for a differentleadership world

360 feedback: ashift in agenda


2/18

2

Overview360 feedback is now a fairly well established practice withinmost medium to large scale organisations, deployed as a stand-alone application for personal development or, increasingly,integrated within performance management and talent planningprocesses.

As a methodology 360 feedback emerged from militaryselection practices during World War 2 when selectors found that

the inclusion of peer evaluations improved predictions of futureeffectiveness. Esso in the US experimented with the approach inthe 1950s, and through the 60s and 70s, 360 feedback evolvedmore widely within the US corporate sector, before migratinginternationally.

With over three decades of significant activity and research, whatdo we know about 360feedback and its impact?

In this review of the research base, and our own evaluation oforganisational experience of what is and isnt working, wehighlight:

.

AM Azure Consulting Ltd 2010

the challenges organisations face in implementing 360feedback when there is increasing pressure to optimiseproductivity and effectiveness

why 360 feedback processes and practices need to berevisited to improve the bang for buck ratio and achievehigher levels of performance for less money and time

practical recommendations to sustain the long-term impact offeedback systems in a changing world


3/18

3

The growing popularity of 360 feedback Disillusionment with conventional performance appraisal, and thereliance on the line manager as the arbiter of judgements ofeffectiveness, contribution and impact underpinned much of theinterest in multi-rater feedback. This trend in turn has beenreinforced by the shift in work patterns (e.g. higher levels offlexible working) and working relationships (e.g. more projectbased activity), dynamics that made the idea of the all-seeingand all-knowing line manager even less defensible.

Organisations looked at alternatives to get a better insight intocurrent performance as well as indicators of potential to progress.

Assessment centres, announced in the 70s as the next bigthing have failed to deliver on their initial promise of significantlybetter predictive validity. Whilst retaining reasonable levels ofmeasurement power, assessment centres are becoming an

increasingly expensive methodology. Worryingly, the latestreview of assessment centre validity reports a decline in reportedvalidity over the last 40 years and observes the reasons for theostensible decline in validity are not clear.

And the evidence of 360 feedbacks power to predict futureperformance compares well with assessment centre validity.360 feedback as a practice also possesses a work relevance

and credibility with participants that assessment centres can lack.Faced with pressures for greater productivity, 360 feedbacklooked a more cost effective option..


The time-consuming bureaucracy of the paper shuffle involved in 360feedback programmes however was a barrier to take up. The arrival ofthe internet and on line technology in the 90s eliminated the need forextensive administrative processing, making the practice accessible toeven small sized firms.

.

Validity of assessment centres for personnel selection, Thornton et al, Human ResourceManagement Review, 2009

Assessment centres and subordinate appraisals of managers: a 7 year examination ofpredictive validity, McEvoy et al, Personnel Psychology, 1989


4/18

4

A summary of the research: mixed findings360 feedback is popular, not only with talent managementprofessionals, but most significantly, with participants themselves.Typically participant satisfaction levels are at the 70-80% mark.

But does the evidence base indicate a methodology that providesaccurate measures of current performance and futureeffectiveness? And does 360 feedback operate as a key dynamicin facilitating the kind of change that drives improvements in

management and leadership performance?Initial research reported encouraging signs in identifying positiverelationships between 360 feedback and objective measures ofproduction, customer satisfaction, sales and profitability.

But in one meta analysis of 26 longitudinal studies, the impact of360 feedback in improving managerial performance was found to

be modest. In another meta-analysis of over 600 studies lookingat the impact of feedback on performance, a third of the studiesshowed a performance decline.

360 feedback - like any other practice - incorporates the good,bad and ugly. We shouldnt expect positive outcomes if themethodology is badly designed, poorly positioned andimplemented, with minimal supporting infrastructure or follow

through.

What factors make the difference?


lt is time for researchers and

practitioners to ask:under whatconditions and withwhom is multi-source

feedback likely to bebeneficial? rather than asking doesmulti-source feedbackwork? Smither et al

The impact of 360 feedback on leadership development, Rehbine, 2006


5/18

5

Specific research findingsWe know that some individuals benefit from 360 feedback. Andothers dont. Indeed, some individuals show a performancedecline after 360feedback. We also know that some practicesand processes build momentum for change and improvement,and others make a minimal impact, or even may be counter-productive.

What, in the words of Chip and Dan Heath in Switch , are the

bright spots, the examples of positive practice that are makingan impact?

We know selection of feedbackers is key . Feedback outputsare only as accurate and insightful as the quality of the feedbackinputs and a maturity that is able and willing to providemeaningful feedback. It also depends on a broad range ofdifferent working relationships . Individuals in roles wherecontact is limited or restricted to a small number of colleagues donot benefit from feedback activity.

Accuracy is lowest for feedbackers who have known the targetindividual for 3-5 years. The most accurate feedback comes fromcolleagues who have known the individual for 1-3 years . Lessthan one year is also problematic. It looks like we needreasonable exposure to provide insightful evaluations; too muchexposure however, and the feedback falls back on halo effectstereotypes.

Feedback that is accessible and can be recalled weeks afterthe initial debrief drives improvement. Complex and confusingfeedback outputs dont trigger change.

Feedback that is specific and grounded in the practicalities ofleadership life works better than more generalised statements ofbehavioural competency.



6/18

6

Specific research findingsIndividual differences in personality make a difference. Thedimension of conscientiousness in the Big Five of personality isassociated with the willingness to participate in development activities,as is Openness to Experience. Neuroticism is a contra indicator ofresponsiveness and change. For highly anxious individuals, 360feedback seems to make things worse. Negative feedback triggers avicious circle of performance decline.

Over-estimators , those individuals with inflated self ratings comparedto others, tend to have diminished organisational and personaloutcomes. Under-estimators , critical of their own effectivenessrelative to the evaluations of their colleagues tend to be perfectionist,more likely to focus on their weaknesses rather than build onestablished strengths.

Individuals who are generally positive towards change are more

likely to act on the feedback, as are individuals who set goals basedon the feedback.

Improvements may be more evident after 2 - 4 years . We shouldnttherefore expect instant change and improvement following theintroduction of 360feedback.



7/18

7

Where does this leave us?


Given the variety of 360 feedback practices - objectives, design,content, response formats, report outputs, and processes fordebrief, follow through and evaluation - it is not surprising thatthere is mixed pattern of research findings.

We are moving into a different business world, one in which therewill be greater pressure for cost efficiency, productivity andoutcomes. This is partly about process logistics and exploitingtechnological innovation to speed up the user experience andimprove administrative efficiency. It is also about themanagement of expectations - before and after the exercise - toposition the exercise and create momentum to translate feedbackinto feedforward.

Importantly it is also about a shrewd insight into the psychology ofpersonal change to optimise the chances of the kind of practical

development planning and implementation that results insustained improvement.

360feedback design and practice needs to reflect thesechanging realities to ensure greater bang for buck, and achievebetter outputs from smaller inputs.

Here are our suggestions:


8/18

8

Four big challenges


Speed and the need for shorter completion timesThere is of course a trade-off between credible andcomprehensive coverage based on robust and defensiblemeasurement and the time required for feedback data capture.But there is a sense that the balance has tipped to unnecessarylength and complexity. The challenge is to retain the power of360 feedback at greater efficiency and speed.

Differentiation to avoid the blob factor which fails to discerndifferences in performance, contribution, impact and outcome.The combination of central tendency and positive skew isntnew to performance evaluation of course. The specific challengefor 360 feedback is to rethink the questions we ask and how weask them to provide a spectrum of feedback outputs, identifyingthe exceptional performer as well as highlighting those strugglingto make an impact.

Turning feedback into feedforward to drive the developmentthat makes for gains in individual and overall performance.Is 360 feedback an exercise in curiousity, emotionalreassurance or introduced to catalyse the change that producesgreater effectiveness? The challenge for 360feedback is tomove it from the analysis of personal reports to set an agenda fordevelopment that results in significant improvements.

Integration with other performance and talent managementprocesses . There has been a move away from 360 feedback asa stand alone application for personal development toincorporate the exercise within the information flows and outputsof wider talent management activity. The challenge here is toensure that this shift is well understood and positioned to provideimportant gains in organisational intelligence and decision

making.

It is the feedback process, not themeasurement process, that

generates the real pay-offs.J Jones & W Bearley


9/18

9

Speed and efficiency of process


Five individuals in your organisation undertake 360 feedbackonce a year. Assuming fifteen feedbackers for each participant,and the feedback takes each person 20 minutes, the overallexercise requires 25 hours, or around 3.5 person days.

As the Americans might say: Do the maths. Multiply up thenumbers. If 100 individuals participate in the feedbackprogramme, the total organisational time will be 71 person days.

But if we manage to reduce feedback completion times to 10minutes, we save over 35 person days. Or if we decide to moveto a more complex leadership framework, designing a feedbackquestionnaire that takes 30 minutes to complete, our organisationhas to factor in 107 person days for the exercise.

In a busy world of competing pressures on organisational time,

360 feedback activity has to improve its speed and efficiency.


10/18

10

Speed and efficiency of process


know what 360 feedback can and cant do . 360 feedback ispowerful in identifying the nuts and bolts of leadership, the visibleactivities of communication, delegation, coaching and so on. It isntwell positioned to address those more cerebral aspects ofleadership such as strategic thinking. Focus feedback content onthe activities which 360feedback is genuinely good at addressingrather than attempt to evaluate every aspect of leadership.

deploy different feedback versions for different applications ,using short versions for high volume activity within a narrow spacein your organisational calendar (e.g. performance reviews), andextended versions for those activities (e.g. executive coaching)requiring a detailed and comprehensive insight.

know who knows what. Line managers have their perspective and

can evaluate some areas of leadership activity and impactmeaningfully, but not others. Peers look sideways and haveexposure to a different experience. And team members haveaccess to many leadership behaviours, but not all. The trick is totarget questionnaire sub-sets for the different feedback groups.Apart from the virtue of reducing overall completion times, this tacticavoids the problem of high levels of cannot says which underminethe credibility of the feedback.

conduct regular reviews to keep fine tuning the process andcontent. Technological innovation opens up new options for greaterprocess productivity. Keep tracking trends to upgrade your systemto exploit these gains.


11/18


12/18

12

Differentiation to avoid the blob factor


The art and science of 360 feedback continues to debate the prosand cons of different response formats and rating scales. Thechallenge of course is to encourage frank feedback that providesa discerning insight into the spectrum of effectiveness.

provide questionnaire statements within the feedback contentthat make it easy for feedbackers to provide candidfeedback. The questionnaire statement , for example, shetells the truth on a 1-5 frequency scale doesnt work. But thestatement she says what she means, and means what shesays does well as one insight into integrity

monitor response patterns to identify and removequestionnaire statements that fail to differentiate. Every360feedback process should provide a balance of challengeand support, and different organisations reflect theiraspirations of excellence differently in the design of 360feedback systems. It is also true that outputs that dont reflectthe continuum of leadership contribution and impact arepointless. Check the balance of feedback content is set at thelevel of expectation your organisation requires.

use a variety of response tasks. As well as conventionalrating scales (1-5 etc) and open ended text, it is worth

incorporating the yes-no format, presenting statements ofleadership activity against the format:is this is an exceptional strength?is this a potential constraint to effectiveness?is this a risk factor for the individual?

The value of 360 feedback systems is improved by technicalimprovements in questionnaire design. But we shouldnt losesight of the reality that 360 feedback works, (i.e. drivesimprovement), for some organisations, but not others. 360feedback works when there is a culture of aspiration based on ademanding set of expectations of excellence, what it looks likeand how it is possible to keep improving. And 360feedback

programmes don't work in a culture of mediocrity, when theprevailing climate is that this is probably as good it will get.

If youre introducing 360 feedback for the first time, its worthchecking what changes need to be implemented to create aresponse climate of maturity, honesty and challenge aroundexcellence rather than assuming 360 feedback alone willtransform your organisational culture.

The impact of 360 feedback on leadership development, Rehbine, 2006


13/18

13

Developing to drive improvement


In an ideal world, 360 feedback outputs would be supported by aone to one debrief with an exceptionally wise external coach,followed up with a review with a progressive and insightful linemanager, and supported by an organisational infrastructure oftargeted training and development and access to acomprehensive on line resource.

The new world wont be ideal. Budgets for facilitated report backvia external coaches are being cut back. Line managers will bebusy, juggling competing priorities and preoccupied with theirpersonal concerns. In this new world we need to be imaginativein how we deploy resources to optimise the impact of 360feedback.

We do know what drives development and it doesnt demand ahuge budget. But it does require the discipline of accountability

and the diligence of follow through.Well designed and implemented 360 feedback systems might fillthe feedback void, the information that current and emergingleaders need as a reality check on whats helping and hinderingtheir effectiveness. But we also need to avoid the feedforwardstall to accelerate the speed from review of feedback results toimplement the practical actions that underpin improvement.

We found that participants whodo not follow up make no progress.The people who improve most havea support group or network thatholds them accountable.Marshall Goldsmith


14/18

14

Developing to drive improvement


simplify the output . This is a genuinely tough nut to crack.Some participants only want a summary of the key findings.Others want a detailed breakdown of the full analysis. Someprefer text based output, others want a visual display of everypattern of the feedback. However complex reports based onevery permutation of number crunching dont help. Find away to summarise the data to indicate the key themes, andmove from analysis to action.

dont assume an initial debrief is enough . As KennethNowack points out many 360 feedback processes seem toassume that the truth will make us free, and that self directedinsight will result in motivated behavioural change. This isdiagnose then adios. It might for a handful of highlymotivated individuals; it doesnt for most. Personal changeand improvement requires the discipline of follow up, and theapplication of deliberate practice.

hold individuals and their line managers accountable.The days in which participants are allowed to file their reportinto a folder called Action Later Maybe are over. Instead,those participating in a 360 feedback exercise should agreeas a minimum to schedule a review session with their linemanager to discuss the headline findings and the implications

for priorities and development.

set an expectation that participants will share the resultswith their direct reports . No doubt a difficult exercise forsome individuals who may be surprised or shocked by thefeedback from their direct reports. But if participants dontconduct this debrief with their team, apart from any damageto personal credibility, they are unlikely to change and

develop.

put in place a mix of facilitated debrief and on line support .Face to face review and coaching is extremely useful, butexpensive. On line leadership resources such aswww.theleadershipdirectory.com , are highly cost-effective,but lack the personal touch. The combination of the twostrategies is powerful, optimising expensive coaching time tofocus face to face meetings on the key issues and using on

line resource for preparation, homework and follow onguidance.


15/18

15

Integration with other talent management practices


360 feedback is widely used as a key activity to supportpersonal and professional development, typically, in combinationwith coaching or as part of a structured leadership developmentprogramme. Increasingly organisations are looking at ways tointegrate the feedback process and outcomes within widerperformance and talent management programmes.

This requires a rethink in both feedback content and processmanagement.

A shift in feedback content . Most 360 feedback systems aredesigned around a framework to evaluate the inputs ofbehavioural competency, but dont address the bottom line ofoutputs: what contribution is the individual making, and what istheir business impact.

The inputs of different leadership capabilities and skills arehelpful in opening up a development agenda to identify any gapsthat may be constraining effectiveness, current strengths that canbe deployed more productively, and any risks of over-playingexisting styles. But this format of feedback doesnt provide adirect answer to the all-important questions of:

is this individual adding significant value to the organisation -

right now?is this an individual who may be ready to make a biggercontribution in future?

Introduce into your feedback process the bottom line questionsthat matter. And of course the bottom line is different for differentwork colleagues who have different expectations of outcome.

line managers want business results and gains inproductivity and innovationfor peers , the bottom line is responsive support and awillingness to take the initiative to resolve any problems oftask coordinationteam members bottom line is a combination of clear

direction, meaningful priorities and the willingness to supporttheir career developmentstakeholders appreciate the proactivity and extra mile thatcreates superior levels of service

Repositioning 360 feedback to identify the outcomes that matterto others rather than evaluate only the inputs of competence isilluminating, differentiating those individuals who understand andmanage the art of leadership juggling and make a consistentand sustained contribution from those who are failing to meet theexpectations of their work colleagues.


16/18

16 AM Azure Consulting Ltd 2010

Integration with other talent management practicesA shift in feedback content is important in moving towards a moreintegrated performance and talent management game plan. Italso requires attention to process management .

If 360feedback reports are accessible only to the individual,clearly organisations can learn little about the activity, eitherabout specific leaders and relative levels of effectiveness andcontribution, or about the pattern of trends that might indicatepotential organisational opportunities and risks.

The trend now is towards using 360feedback data to informtalent decision making:

producing pen portrait summaries that identify keythemes in line management, peer and team memberevaluations. These summaries, integrated with other careerand performance data, feed into succession reviews and

shape priorities and action planning.

smarter database management to integrate 360feedbacksummaries into talent planning software. The days of files infolders in filing cabinets should be over, but in realityorganisations still struggle to integrate their knowledge oftheir people. The import of 360feedback informationenriches your talent database, providing importantintelligence about the breadth and depth of professional andleadership capability.

data mining to identify over rated talent (e.g. high linemanagement evaluations but indifferent feedback from peersand direct reports) and neglected talent (low linemanagement evaluations but positive evaluations from otherfeedback groups) who rarely surface during successiondiscussions. This is using 360feedback outcomes tochallenge the established top down perceptions of theusual suspects and rethink the pool of current and emergingtalent.


17/18

17

Conclusions


360 feedback, from its origins over 50 years ago, has beendominated by a specific paradigm, the mind-set of thepsychometricians. Measurement rigour has been emphasisedover the realities of personal change or the pragmatics oforganisational life.

At best, this tradition has ensured that feedback programmeshave been accompanied by systematic evaluation and theconsolidation of an evidence base. At worst, this approach hasresulted in over-engineered instruments that are time-consumingand in their complexity, actually hold back the process offeedforward and development planning.

360feedback has many virtues. It is viewed positively byparticipants as relevant and credible. It reflects the reality ofshifting working dynamics. And well positioned and implementedit does achieve performance gains.

The challenge now is to optimise these gains through the designof shorter and simpler tools with big hitting power, the building ofan organisational culture and infrastructure of accountability anddiscipline, repositioning processes to connect to the broadertalent management agenda, and exploiting the benefits oftechnology to provide supporting resource.

And, to reflect these priorities, it may be time for a change ofname, and move from feedback to Feedforward.


18/18


About us

AM Azure Consulting Ltd works with a broad portfolio ofclients in the design and implementation of on line servicesin recruitment and selection; management assessment,development and career management; on line leadershiptool kits, 360feedback, performance management; andtalent and succession management.

If you are interested in our approach to leadershipassessment and development, our assessment tools andour on line resource at www.theleadershipdirectory.com callus:

44 (0) 1608 654007 or [email protected]

were professionals but were not pompous. We are atthe edge of the latest research and thinking in the field ofpeople management, but were not precious about the onething. We have some good ideas to help your organisationperform even better, but we know that you have some betterones, but want support in making them work. We dontimpose the solution.

we design but we also implement. Our content, designand technology can build cost effective solutions quickly.Our consultancy experience of real world implementationwill move things forward from initial concept to resultsrapidly.

we start things to build momentum but we also followthrough. Results come from the discipline of making itstick, of evaluation, learning and continual improvement.And we maintain ongoing relationships with our clients tokeep achieving positive outcomes.

18

360feedback-anewagenda

Documents