The Impact of 360-Degree Feedback

The Impact of 360 Degree Feedback

Does multi-source feedback alone improve performance?

Previous research has not examined whether managers' responses to upward / multi-source feedback are linked with performance improvement. In a recent article, Walker & Smither (1999) suggest that performance improvements will depend on the extent to which managers use the feedback report to set performance improvement goals and monitor their progress toward those goals. The idea builds on Locke and Latham (1990), who identified that it is the goals that people set as a result of feedback that cause behaviour change not the feedback itself.

Making managers accountable

It has been identified (London et al,1997) that managers often receive upward or multisource feedback for developmental purposes and are not accountable for using the feedback in a constructive manner. They argued that upward or multi-source feedback is unlikely to be very beneficial when managers are not accountable for using the feedback to guide performance improvement. It is rare that the ratee is required to discuss or share their feedback and about 40 per cent of programs provide feedback only once. Additionally, many programs do not require ratees to participate in specific developmental or training interventions as a result of the feedback (London & Smither, 1995).

Are managers responses to feedback related to subsequent performance improvements?

Walker and Smither's carried out a five year study using approximately 5000 employees. The data collected was part of a major organisational development program designed to identify and develop leadership potential. The main findings were that:

1) Managers performance improved as a result of the upward feedback program.

2) Managers who initially received poor or moderate ratings improved more than managers who initially received more favourable ratings

3) Managers who held feedback sessions to discuss their upward feedback with direct reports improved more than other managers.
The results indicate that upward feedback programs can lead to improvements in feedback scores that can continue over time. It also appears that feedback is more effective when managers hold meetings with their direct reports to talk over the feedback

What can organisations do to enhance the value of multi-source feedback?

Walker and Smither suggest that organisations need to actively increase the accountability of those receiving the feedback. This could be done by:

Discussion with direct reports -which would affect:

- How well the feedback is understood
- Goal setting
- Goal commitment

Additionally London & Daiesso advocate:

- Supervisor evaluation of the extent to which the agreed developmental goals were achieved.
- Committing publicly to changing behaviour
- Discussing results with a skilled facilitator
- Creating a development plan
- Participating in training linked to feedback results
- Rewards for continuous improvement

Walker and Smither state that it is important that emphasis is placed on what managers do with the feedback they receive. Of additional importance are the steps that organisations take to encourage managers to use feedback to guide behaviour change.

Reference

Walker, A.G. & Smither, J.W. (1999). A Five-Year Study of Upward Feedback: What managers do with their results matters. Personnel Psychology Vol. 52, Pages 393 - 423.

Newsletter: 2003

Human Assets