GETTING 360 DEGREE

FEEDBACK RIGHT
By Maury A. Peiperl

Presented by:
Lawi Anupam
1224108221
GITAM Institute of International Business
 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK
 An assessment process used to improve managerial
effectiveness by providing the manager with a more
complete assessment of their effectiveness, and their
performance and development needs.

 The process of getting feedback from multiple sources.

(peers, subordinates, customers, supervisors)

 Also called as “Peer Appraisal”.

 (In Ma
t ern nag
al c er
ust
om

(In Su
er)

t e bo
rn rd
a l in

m
cu at e

er
st o s
)
Top Management
(Internal customer)

or Co (In
(In te -w ter
ter am ork Re nal
na m er
l c em s
Ot pres cus
he t
us be r D enta ome
to rs
m
ep tive r)
er
art
)
me s
nt
 PROCEDURES FOR
CONDUCTING 360 DEGREE
APPRAISAL

 Develop questionnaire
 Ensure confidentiality
 Provide training / orientation
 Administer the feedback
 Analyze the data
 Develop and distribute results
PROS OF 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK

The system is more comprehensive in that responses are gathered from
multiple perspectives.


Quality of information is better.


It may lessen bias/prejudice since feedback comes from more people,
not one individual.


Feedback from peers and others may increase employee self-
development.

 Helps in identification of strength and weakness of employees.

CONS OF 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK

The system is complex in combining all the responses.


Feedback may not be fair.

 There may be conflicting opinions, though they may all be accurate from the
respective standpoints.

 Employees may collude or “game” the system by giving invalid evaluations

to one another.

 Consumes enormous time and very costly.


Difficult for cross-cultural organizations.

 Maintaining confidentiality is difficult.

 MANAGING “PEER” IN PEER
APPRAISAL
 Go public with your support

 Be a counselor and role model

 Provide training early and often

 Put substance before rankings

 Let people know when they are not doing peer

appraisal well
 PARADOX OF ROLES
YOU CANNOT BE BOTH A PEER AND A JUDGE

Disadvantages

Give fairly conservative feedback


Feedback may be distorted, overly positive unhelpful to
managers and recipients.

 Negative feedback may damage relationship.


Hurt own careers and those of friends and colleagues.
 PARADOX OF GROUP
PERFORMANCE
FOCUSING ON INDIVIDUALS PUTS THE
ENTIRE GROUP AT RISK

Disadvantages
 Ignores group dynamics and work realities.

 May harm close-knit and successful groups.

 Low performing groups believe it as a veiled attempt to assess blame.

 Can breed cynicism, suspicion and an “us-against them” mentality.

 MEASUREMENT PARADOX
THE EASIER FEEDBACK IS TO GATHER,
THE HARDER IT IS TO APPLY

Advantages

Give qualitative comments and insights to the employee.

Disadvantages

Process required excessive amount of paperwork.

System lack a mechanism for giving or setting detailed
feedback beyond a letter.

Time consuming.
 Not easily compared and aggregated.
 Qualitative feedback is more difficult.
 PARADOX OF REWARDS
WHEN PEER APPRAISAL COUNTS THE
MOST, IT HELPS THE LEAST

Disadvantages

People focus virtually all their attention on reward outcomes.


Threat to feelings of self-worth.


Affect salary reviews and promotions
 MANAGING THROUGH
PARADOXES
 To provide timely and useful feedback to improve the performance
of the individual.

 Employee receives detailed and qualitative feedback.

 This is accompanied by coaching and counseling.

 To check that the things are going smoothly and to head off major
conflicts.

 Improve ties between groups.

 Aimed at distributing authority and responsibility more broadly

throughout an organization.
THANK YOU