360_Degree_Performance_Appraisal-Final_Copy

Topic: 360 Degree Performance Appraisal Sources of feedback relevant to an appraisal are highlighted by the 360 Degree (360°) Appraisal. The literature review discussed here highlights the sources of feedback relevant to performance appraisal. This multisource assessment is the most comprehensive appraisal where feedback about the employees’ performance comes from all the sources that come in contact with the employee on the job. Typical 360° Feedback surveys solicit and analyze input from the participants’ immediate supervisor(s), peers, direct reports, suppliers and customers (if applicable). Self-ratings are also often included. Although 360° ratings team membership may vary, all sources agree that rater anonymity must be guaranteed. The collective intelligence these respondents provide on critical competencies or specific behaviors and skills gives the employee, a clear understanding of personal strengths and areas ripe for development (Edwards, 1996). Managers/Supervisor Ratings Supervisor and Managers ratings are mostly not anonymous. The supervisor-only performance appraisal is subjective and relies on the supervisor's judgment. They are typically given once a year, assessing the employees work performance from a subjective point of view and providing management information for decisions on pay and promotions (Edwards & Ewen, 1996). Self-Ratings Self ratings tend to facilitate behavioral change because managers can compare their self-perceptions directly with how others see them (London & Beatty, 1993). Peer (Co-worker) Ratings Peers can provide valuable feedback on performance, particularly where teamwork occurs. “Peers may be in the best position to provide feedback on skills such as working with others and teamwork, decision-making and technical capabilities” (Pollack & Pollack, 1996). Subordinate Ratings Subordinates provide a credible source of information about their managers. They are often in better positions to observe and evaluate certain managerial dimensions than any other source of assessment. According to Pollack and Pollack (1996), “subordinates may be the best source of information on delegation, interpersonal, teambuilding, communication, and leadership skills.” Customer (Vendor, Suppliers) Rating Pollack & Pollack suggests that, “customers may be the best source of input on quality of work and service orientation”. They also note that there are no studies confirming the validity of customer derived data. In fact, the organizations they studied recommend against using customer feedback. Benefits of 360 Degree Appraisal The use of 360° Appraisal or multiple raters adds objectivity to the appraisal system and lends credibility. Most research shows that multiple rater composites are better estimates of an employees’ true value than individual judgments (Edwards & Sproull, 1983). Multiple raters provide a more accurate picture than single raters due to their diverse perspectives on the participants’ behavior. Major concerns in 360 Degree Appraisal One major concern of 360° Feedback systems is subordinates’ ratings. Recently, subordinates get the opportunity to assess their superiors and participate in some of the decision-making processes. Additionally, this evaluation process is more time intensive and is much more administratively complex (Kirksey, et al. 1994).  If the evaluation process is implemented poorly or the evaluations themselves are completed without care, the process can create widespread resentment and confusion (DeBare, 1997). References: * Edwards, M. R., & Ewen, A. J. (1996). 360° Feedback, the Powerful New Model for Employee Assessment & Performance Improvement, (American Management Association: New York). * Performance Management Research Report, http://www.orgsysinc.com/downloads/PerformanceManagementResearchReport2002.pdf * EVALUATING THE CONCEPT OF THE 360-DEGREE FEEDBACK EVALUATION FOR THE DELTONA FIRE DEPARTMENT. http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/pdf/efop/efo37834.pdf * Performance Management. A White Paper. http://www.sba.pdx.edu/faculty/wallyp/461/PerfMgmt.doc>. * Sigma Assessment. http://www.sigmaassessmentsystems.com/articles/