Love me, love me not, love me, love me not: this is the contemplation
of the day when it comes to the 360-Degree Feedback instrument. Although this tool is one of the most
frequently used evaluation tools in corporate America today, it is a tool that
is no different than any other tool on the market; it is perfect for some and
not so much for others. Organizations
that find it to be a best practice evaluation method are those that adhere to a
participatory leadership style in the area of feedback, those who have a
culture that “support open and honest feedback”, those who promote employees
based on skill level and performance, those who have a culture where employees
are not fearful of speaking up and those who have employees who desire to
improve their performance (Aguinis, 2013, p. 211). Additionally, it must be noted that this tool
is not designed to evaluate job specific competencies, but competencies such as
“communication, leadership, adaptability, relationship [building], task
management, production, and personal development (Aguinis, pp. 208 – 209).
Identifying cultural fit is one of the first steps to
determining whether or not the 360-Degree feedback tool is the right
intervention for the intended organizational outcome. This instrument, like others, holds both
advantages and disadvantages when using or applying it. Understanding these factors and how to obtain
the most from the tool is key to its overall success. First, the advantages of the 360-Degree Feedback
tool, when applied effectively, are as follows: the instrument has the
potential of “decreasing [the] possibility of biases, increasing awareness of
expectations, increasing commitment to improve, improving self-perception of
performance, improving performance, reducing undiscussables, and enabling employees to take control of their
careers” (Aguinis, 2013, pp. 213-214). However, this is not the end of the story;
we must evaluate the challenges associated with this instrument to gain a full
understanding of this tool.
It should be of no surprise that the 360-Degree feedback
tool comes with challenges. One of the
most challenging aspects of the instrument is that not everyone welcomes
feedback, nor are they willing to adopt the feedback they receive. Also, if employees do not feel as if the
information they receive about themselves is given with the intent to help them
rather than hurt them, they don’t want anything to do with it. It really comes down to trust; trust of the
organization and the people providing the feedback. To add to this challenge is the dilemma of
who will provide the needed feedback.
Are there enough employees providing feedback to maintain
anonymity? Finally, if there is not a
commitment within the organization to implement the tool at least twice, the information
becomes less valuable and believable among those participating.
Getting the bang for a buck is never a guaranteed
proposition. However, organizations that
reach this end are those that use and apply the instrument as it was intended
to be used. Pulling aspects of the
information found in the results nestled in the body of the tool can be seen as
miss leading and manipulative. The
application of this process is critical to the overall success of the
instrument. If those who are participating
in the implementation of the tool do not trust the leaders who are implementing
the device, the bang the organization will hear is the sound that comes from
employees who express their mistrust with the organization, fellow employees
and the tool itself.
Reference:
Aguinis, H. (2013). Performance
management (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
