360-DEGREE FEEDBACK ANALYSIS 1

Course Name

Professor’s Name

University

City

Date
360-DEGREE FEEDBACK ANALYSIS 2

360-Degree Feedback Analysis

Companies have different ways that they use to assess and improve employees’

performance. Some of these methods are effective while used appropriately and also can be very

harmful if they are used with inadequate attention. One of the methods used in analyzing workers

performance is the 360-degree feedback system. The assessment technique involves the use of

different raters who include, the supervisors, boss, and peer workers to give feedback regarding a

particular employee. This process involves stating of strengths and weaknesses of the employee

being assessed. This method is used in different countries like China, United Kingdom, and

Argentina just to mention. However, even if this approach is used in different places, it is not the

best method for managing workers’ management in an organization. The reasons are the cultural

factors, lack of proper attention from the supervisors, nature of the raters, and also use of a small

number of raters can decrease the quality of results.

360-degree feedback is not the best method for improving the workers’ performance

because of the variability caused by cultural factors. Depending on where a person comes from,

the results done from the study can vary. People are raised differently and thus have different

perception towards certain things which includes work and the peers. The cultural factors mostly

affecting this analysis system are the power distance system and formal feedback mechanism.

Some systems in the feedback mechanism conflicts with some cultural aspects in different

countries which may affect the success of the process (Brutus et al., 2006). Therefore, there is a

necessity in studying the cultures of the raters which could be time-consuming. Some cultures,

including a workplace culture, have a tendency of protecting the peers and explaining in lengthy

on the positive side of the peer workers while briefing on the downside (Brutus et al., 2006). This
360-DEGREE FEEDBACK ANALYSIS 3

can lead to the release of biased information thus making 360-degree feedback system a poor

method of improving employees’ performance.

The next evidence proofing that 360-degree feedback is not the best is the fact that

supervisors pay little attention to workers while rating an employee. Different factors affect the

way a supervisor evaluates his or her subordinates. First, is stereotyping; directors tend to

perceive an employee performance depending on like or dislike (Semeijn, Van Der Heijden and

Van Der Lee, 2014). Age is one of the factors that affect manager’s response toward the

strengths and weaknesses of a certain worker. For example, managers have a negative perception

towards workers above the age of fifty as compared to the younger employees (Semeijn, Van Der

Heijden and Van Der Lee, 2014). The other factor affecting the rating between the employees

and the subordinates is a lack of proper communication. Therefore, it means that the two do not

know what the other likes or dislikes, therefore, either of the two may feel unsatisfied with the

performance of the other individual thus leading to a poor rating. When a supervisor fails to

communicate to the subordinates, there is a likelihood of getting a wrong impression. Such

factors affect the feedback system leading to false results.

The nature of the raters is another factor affecting the 360-degree feedback system. Some

workers have less information about the purpose of the study. Also, the relationship between the

raters and the rate is a factor describing how the nature of the rates can affect the feedback

mechanism. The aim of 360-degree feedback is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of

workers in an organization. Getting the information helps improve the performance of this

individual, therefore, their performance. However, the workers may not know about the purpose

of such a study. The character of the raters which would sometimes depend on the relationship

with the ratee would result in a biased feedback. For instance, a weak relationship would lead to
360-DEGREE FEEDBACK ANALYSIS 4

personalizing of the situation and thus give negative and false information about a certain

worker. In another scenario, strong relationships and trust between two employees may result in

the delivery of false but positive information regarding a person. 360-degree feedback does not

require any trust among individuals. An interviewee needs to be neutral while answering the

questionnaire. Therefore, it is clear that the relationship affects the study method less effective in

improving employees’ performance.

360-degree feedback cannot be effective with the use of few individuals. Using few

people would increase the chances of biased comments. Therefore, it is necessary to use a large

number of interviewees (Hensel et al., 2010). It means that in areas with few number of

employees, the results of the study cannot be convenient enough to rely on while making

changes to improve staff performance (Hensel et al., 2010). From the challenges mentioned

earlier, few number of employees would make it hard to determine the truth in the feedback

provided. Therefore, disqualifying 360-degree feedback system in the small organization. On the

other hand, using a significant number of interviewees would be time and resource consuming.

Therefore, the study system cannot be the most effective in improving workers performances in

the small organization due to the high possibility of errors and also it is time-consuming since it

requires larger population for results to be effective.

In summary, there is a need for every business organization to improve employees’

performance. 360-degree feedback is a system of study used in different countries to identify the

strengths and weaknesses of employees further leading to improvement of employees’

performance. However, the method is not the best way of managing employees’ performance.

According to different studies, it is evident that the method has many different challenges which

would affect the steps to be taken. These challenges include cultural factors, lack of proper
360-DEGREE FEEDBACK ANALYSIS 5

attention from the supervisors, nature of the workers and the limitation of use of few

interviewees. All these factors affect the feedback given by the raters which lead to the

application of wrong information in employees’ performance improvement. Use of such an

incorrect information would result in changes in the wrong areas. Therefore, due to the

mentioned challenges, this method is not the most convenient method for improving employee’s

performance. However, it can be effective if research is done in a bid to eliminate the challenges

mentioned.
360-DEGREE FEEDBACK ANALYSIS 6

References List

Brutus, S., Derayeh, M., Fletcher, C., Bailey, C., Velazquez, P., Shi, K., Simon, C. and Labath,

V. (2006). Internationalization of multi-source feedback systems: a six-country

exploratory analysis of 360-degree feedback. The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 17(11), pp.1888-1906.

Hensel, R., Meijers, F., van der Leeden, R. and Kessels, J. (2010). 360 degree feedback: how

many raters are needed for reliable ratings on the capacity to develop competences, with

personal qualities as developmental goals?. The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 21(15), pp.2813-2830.

Semeijn, J., Van Der Heijden, B. and Van Der Lee, A. (2014). Multisource Ratings Of

Managerial Competencies And Their Predictive Value For Managerial And

Organizational Effectiveness. Human Resource Management, 53(5), pp.773-794.

Van der Heijden, B.I. and Nijhof, A.H., 2004. The value of subjectivity: problems and prospects

for 360-degree appraisal systems. The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 15(3), pp.493-511.