Professional Documents
Culture Documents
HYPOTHESIS
HYPOTHESIS
“Employee performance evaluation is perceived to be better in 360 degree multi-source
feedback than in single source feedback system.”
1
Seminar in Economic Policy
OBJECTIVE OF THESIS
The purpose of my thesis is to study whether the Multi source performance appraisal is
more comprehensive, credible and effective performance measure for the organization as
compared to the single rater appraisal system.
INTRODUCTION
(360-DEGREE)
CONCEPT
.
It is a tool that provides each employee the opportunity to receive performance feedback
from his or her supervisor and four to eight peers, reporting staff members, co-workers
and customers. 360-degree feedback allows each individual to understand how others
view his/her effectiveness as an employee, co-worker, or staff member. The feedback
provides insight about the skills and behaviors desired in the organization to accomplish
the mission, vision, and goals and live the values. The feedback is firmly planted in
behaviors needed to exceed customer expectations.
2
Seminar in Economic Policy
The organizational culture and mission must be considered, and the purpose of
feedback will differ with each source. For example, subordinate assessments of a
supervisor’s performance can provide valuable developmental guidance, peer feedback
can be the heart of excellence in teamwork, and customer service feedback focuses on the
quality of the team’s or agency’s results. The objectives of performance appraisal and the
particular aspects of performance that are to be assessed must be established before
determining which sources are appropriate.
SELF-ASSESSMENT
This form of performance information is actually quite common but usually used only as
an informal part of the supervisor-employee appraisal feedback session. Supervisors
frequently open the discussion with: “How do you feel you have performed?” In a
somewhat more formal approach, supervisors ask employees to identify the key
accomplishments they feel best represent their performance in critical and non-critical
performance elements. In a 360-degree approach, if self-ratings are going to be included,
structured forms and formal procedures are recommended.
BENEFITS
• The most significant contribution of self-ratings is the improved communication
between supervisors and subordinates that results.
• Self-ratings are particularly useful if the entire cycle of performance management
involves the employee in a self-assessment. For example, the employee should
keep notes of task accomplishments and failures throughout the performance-
monitoring period.
SUPERIORS
Evaluations by superiors are the most traditional source of employee feedback. This form
of evaluation includes both the ratings of individuals by supervisors on elements in an
employee’s performance plan and the evaluation of programs and teams by senior
3
Seminar in Economic Policy
managers The danger in supervisory evaluations is the substantial amount of power and
influence wielded, often by the hand of a single rater.
BENEFITS
• The first-line supervisor is often in the best position to effectively carry out the
full cycle of performance management
• The supervisor may also have the broadest perspective on the work requirements
and be able to take into account shifts in those requirements.
PEERS
Reduced hierarchies in organizations, as well as the increasing use of teams and group
accountability, peers are often the most pertinent evaluators of their colleagues’
performance. Peers have a unique perspective on a co-worker’s job performance and
employees are generally very receptive to the concept of rating each other. Peer ratings
can be used when the employee’s expertise is known or the performance and results can
be observed. There are both significant contributions and serious pitfalls that must be
carefully considered before including this type of feedback in a multifaceted appraisal
program.
BENEFIT
¨The addition of peer feedback can help move the supervisor into a coaching role rather
than a purely judging role.
SUBORDINATE.
4
Seminar in Economic Policy
BENEFITS
CUSTOMERS
Evaluations by outside clientele may be useful in instances when there is much personal
contact with outsiders or when the person being evaluated knows more about aspects of
the job than the supervisor. Internal customers are defined as users of products or services
supplied by another employee or group within the agency or organization may contribute
significant input
Single Source Performance Appraisal relies heavily on supervisor opinion & judgment
Moreover, they usually don’t work; they neither differentiate levels of performance nor
motivate employees to improve performance.
5
Seminar in Economic Policy
•
• Nepotism and Politics may dilute assessment. It may reflect the quality of the
rater-ratee relationship, not the actual work performance of employees.
• Once a worker is classified as a poor performer, it may take a long time for a
supervisor to notice the worker has improved.
• One particularly good or poor trait may contaminate other performance areas
considered in the evaluation.
• Different supervisors may have different standards in making evaluation
decisions
• Supervisors may tend to rate workers as average, especially when rating forms
require a written justification for a high or low rating.
Hence an employee’s supervisor-only performance appraisal may not truly reflect the
individual’s actual job performance. High-performing employees may receive poor
appraisals that limit their opportunity for rewards such as pay increases and promotions
due to the idiosyncrasies of the supervisor.
Leaders and employees at all levels of organizations are changing the way they receive
feedback in order to improve the quality of information. The new model for performance
feedback and appraisal turns the assessment process upside down. People are asking for
performance feedback from those with knowledge of their work behaviors, as well as
from their supervisor. This information, that comes from many asking for and getting
information from people rather than just is more honest, reliable and valid than traditional
6
Seminar in Economic Policy
appraisals from supervisor only. Moreover, feedback from these multiple sources has a
more powerful impact on people than information from a single source, such as a
supervisor. In fact, no organization action has more power for motivating employee
behavior change than feedback from credible work associates.
METHODOLOGY
SAMPLE SIZE
The sample size includes two organizations, one using Multi source appraisal system and
the other using the Single-Source appraisal system.
Getz Pharma pharmaceuticals Company. (Uses Multi Source feedback)
EVA edible oil company (uses Single-Source appraisal system)
RESPONDENTS
QUESTIONNAIRE
7
Seminar in Economic Policy
• Self
• Manager (Boss)
• Peers
• Internal Customers
• External Customers
• Supervisor
Q3 What are the possible reasons for using the current appraisal system?
Objectivity in evaluation
8
Seminar in Economic Policy
Yes No
• Self Peers
• Internal Customers
• External Customers
• Manager (Boss)
• Direct Reports
• Supervisor
Upper Management
Middle Management
Lower Management
9
Seminar in Economic Policy
Team Work: Use of teams and group accountability. Making most out of the
collective expertise. Builds consensus and shares relevant information
Q8. Are the results of the appraisal shared with the participants (evaluators &
evaluates)?
Yes No
Q9. What has been the impact on the following participants after the appraisal?
10
Seminar in Economic Policy
Upper Management
Middle Management
Lower Management
Negative Positive
External Customer responsiveness
Building relationships (with customers)
Value maximization
Voluntary Termination
Absenteeism
Employee Productivity
Costs Competitiveness
QUESTIONNAIRE ANALYSIS
QUESTION. 1
11
Seminar in Economic Policy
There are two organizations in this research; one implements the single source appraisal
system (EVA edible oil company) and the other GETZ PHARMA implements the 360-
degree form of system
QUESTION .2
What are the objectives behind using the current appraisal?
360-degree appraisal Single source
system (GETZ appraisal system
PHARMA) (EVA)
Provides a broader perspective of employee performance 5 3
Objectivity in evaluation 5 0
Encourages two way communication 5 5
Assist in creating healthy changes in organization 2 0
Increases accountability of employees to their customers 2 0
Align employee performance with organization vision & 5 3
values
Provides input for performance appraisals 0 0
Platform for promoting Internal recruitment Policy 4 2
Influence employee development, motivation and job 3 0
satisfaction
Analysis
100% of the respondents using the single source appraisal system stated that it
appreciates two-way communication. 60% of the respondents were of the view that the
single source appraisal system allows to have a broader look at employee’s performance
12
Seminar in Economic Policy
as compared to 100% in Multi Source appraisal. The above analysis indicates that
employee perceive more objectivity and fairness in 360 degree appraisal
Multi source appraisal showed better results about the skills and behaviors desired in the
organization to accomplish the mission, vision, and goals.60% of the respondents stated
that it assists each individual to understand his or her strengths and weaknesses, and to
contribute insights into aspects of his or her work. The feedback can firmly be planted in
behaviors needed to exceed customer expectations
Helps Changing
performance with the goals
motivation, performance,
Organisation
Influences employee
QUESTION .3
.
Who are the Raters Involved in the Process
• Self
• Manager (Boss)
13
Seminar in Economic Policy
• Direct Reports
• Peers
• Internal Customers
• External Customers
• Supervisor
SUPERVISOR No No
Analysis
The Multi source appraisal involves all Managers, Department Heads Customers, Peers
and Supervisors to minimize biasness, prejudice and deficiencies that are prevalent in
single rate system. Although this approach can be time consuming but it can pay
dividends for the company in the long run in the form of productivity, low turn over and
loyalty etc.
14
Evaluators
Seminar in Economic Policy
Yes
No
QUESTION .4
Yes No
Analysis
There are no accountability checks in the single source appraisal system. Whereas in the
360-degree appraisal system there are accountability checks; at GETZ PHARMA
15
Seminar in Economic Policy
employees get an opportunity to express their views both verbally and on the document
itself.
No
Accountability checks
QUESTION .5
• Peers
WEIGHTAGES ASSIGNED
16
Seminar in Economic Policy
Analysis
The above figure reveals that equal weight age is assigned to all the key assessors to
minimize the undue / substantial influence of one or two evaluators. The consensus of
opinion enhances the credibility of the evaluation process .In the single source appraisal
system there are no weightages assigned to both the supervisor and the section /
department head.
17
Seminar in Economic Policy
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
SUPERVISOR
CUSTOMER
CUSTOMER
MANAGER
PEERS &
SELF
REPORT
OTHERS
EXTERNAL
DIRECT
INTERNAL
Single source appraisal 360-degree appraisal
QUESTION .5
What layers of management are assessed through the appraisal?
Upper Management
Middle Management
Lower Management
18
Seminar in Economic Policy
Analysis
All the management layers are assessed in both the single source appraisal system and the
multi source 360-degree appraisal system.
Yes
No
QUESTION .7
Team Work: Use of teams and group accountability. Making most out of the
collective expertise. Builds consensus and shares relevant information
19
Seminar in Economic Policy
Proactive No No
Analysis
20
Seminar in Economic Policy
The above question was targeted to explore the assessment criteria used in both the single
source and Multi Source appraisal system. According to the answers given by the
participants, the single source appraisal system in EVA assesses:
None of the appraisal system focused on employee,s initiative taking ability probably
due to lower & upper managment limited span of control.
QUESTION .8
Are the results of the appraisal shared with the participants (evaluators &
evaluates)?
21
Seminar in Economic Policy
Yes No
SHARING OF RESULTS
Single source appraisal Yes
360-degree appraisal YES
Analysis
Respondents in both the forms of appraisal system stated that the results are shared with
them (the ratee’s).
QUESTION .9
Yes
No
Accountability checks
What has been the impact on all the layers of Management after the appraisal?
Upper Management
Middle Management
Lower Management
22
Seminar in Economic Policy
Middle Management 5 0 0 5 0 0
Lower Management 3 0 2 5 0 0
Analysis
This question was aimed at finding out the changes that occurred after the appraisal was
carried out.
After the single source appraisal, 100% respondents felt a positive change in the upper
management and the middle management levels, in terms of the efforts being made.
Whereas 60% felt a positive change, 40% felt no change in the lower management level.
After the 360-degree appraisal, 100% respondents felt a positive change in all the three
management levels.
QUESTION. 10
Negative Positive
External Customer responsiveness
Building relationships (with customers)
Value maximization
Voluntary Termination
23
Seminar in Economic Policy
Absenteeism
Employee Productivity
Costs Competitiveness
External Customer 0 0 0 4
responsiveness
Building relationships (with 0 0 0 5
customers)
Value maximization 0 0 0 3
Voluntary Termination 0 0 0 2
Absenteeism 0 0 0 3
Employee Productivity 0 0 0 2
Costs Competitiveness 0 0 0 0
Analysis
This question was aimed at finding out the impact on the various aspects stated above,
after the appraisal in both the organizations.
24
Seminar in Economic Policy
As far as the single source appraisal is concerned, all the respondents felt that there was
no direct link between this form of appraisal and the stated areas.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
25
Seminar in Economic Policy
CONCLUSION:
I may conclude that it has been proved Multi source performance appraisal is more
comprehensive, credible and effective performance measure for the organization as
compared to the single rater appraisal system and the hypothesis states true that
“Employee performance evaluation is perceived to be better in 360 degree multi-
source feedback than in single source feedback system.”
26
Seminar in Economic Policy
27