Note from Art: this rave was prompted by one too many discussions with good people about the frustration they feel over their firm’s evaluation systems and the lack of good quality developmental feedback.
While I’m certain there’s a good 360-degree feedback program out there somewhere, the trash frequently heaped upon unwitting corporate victims by misguided management groups via their HR departments is….well, it’s trash. Please place it in a proper container and dispose of it before it starts to stink.
Vague input filled with gross generalizations provided by untrained (in delivering evaluations and providing feedback) and potentially politically motivated individuals is truly not worth the paper it’s printed on. In fact, these systems are often de-motivating, potentially destructive and often nothing more than a compliance game that distorts behaviors and keeps people from having the right discussions for fear of reprisal.
Talent development is a critical responsibility and the delivery of high quality, timely, behavioral, specific and business-oriented input is priceless. Priceless and all-too rare.
What’s a Manager to Do? 4 Ideas:
If you’re stuck with one of these turkeys…the kind that asks others to assess their opinion on the value of your role with questions such as: “Is this a valuable position?” I empathize with you. Perhaps the spirit of revolution sweeping parts of the world will translate to disgust at poor evaluation and feedback systems and cause managers and employees to rise up. Just in case that doesn’t happen, here are some suggestions:
1. Redouble your efforts. The existence of a 360-degree system does not allow you to abrogate your responsibility for constant evaluation and timely behavioral and business focused feedback. In fact, the system creates so much FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) in the workplace, that your work here is essential for salvaging the working environment. Seek developmental support, training, coaching/mentoring and study and practice delivering feedback until you develop both competence and comfort.
2. Encourage improvement in the system, but don’t expect much. Push to encourage organizational investment in teaching and training on how to offer input with some redeeming actionable value. Short of the overthrow of the 360-degree system, you’ve got an obligation within your organization to encourage improvements that might move the value meter for the process in the proper direction.
3. Build an effective feedback culture on your team. Encourage and reinforce the obligation people have to engage in constructive, open discussion about group and individual performance. I observe teams all of the time that don’t do this, and the results are always sub-par.
People need to trust you and their team members before they talk openly about key issues, and you own the responsibility for creating an environment of trust. It’s hard work, and requires you to “do as you say” in all matters, including soliciting, accepting and acting upon feedback on your performance from your team members.
4. Champion great people. Regardless of evaluation systems, top leaders are almost always interested in finding people who can do more. It’s OK to advocate for those with potential, and your advocacy can help to stand out in spite of the fog of the evaluation system.
The Bottom-Line for Now:
Don’t fall into the trap of letting internal systems and programs do your work as a developer of talent. I’ve witnessed good 360-Systems in cases where reviewers were vetted and selected based on evaluation of their ability to provide quality input…and then were active in a professionally administered program. Unfortunately, most people and most firms don’t take the time to move these programs beyond a compliance tool to this level.
You own the responsibility to deal with the good and bad of performance on your team, and no sheet of paper will substitute for your deliberate and relentless work observing, evaluating, and engaging with others to reinforce the good and help stomp out the bad. And remember, this isn’t a game. It’s serious business with the goal of developing great people to grow your business.
I appreciate the ideas for managers on how to help the 360 feedback work and I agree with them. However, I wanted to mention a tool that I found useful for my development and it was the Career Leader 360 degree feedback survey and I think feedback should be given in this manner for employer settings as well. What I liked about it was that the people I asked for feedback from had to rate me on a scale on very specific questions, so there was no generalization or exaggeration and I asked them to be very honest. The participants were also aware that their feedback was entirely confidential and I wouldn’t even be able to get the analysis of the feedback until at least 4 people participated. So it watered down the results because it was an average of all these people I interact with and their responses on these specific questions. The feedback I received was significant especially because I selected people I may not have wanted to hear their verbal feedback that was undirected but was ok with this direct, anonymous online survey. I was able to see on a rated scale where I could improve and how others may perceive my actions.
Megan, it sounds better than some. Thanks so much for sharing your experience. I do believe in the critical value of feedback…but not all feedback is created equal. Best, -Art
Good Post Art,
I haven’t seen much of the the 360 systems, but the two I have seen didn’t work very well. They became opportunities for gossip and were never really useful for employee evaluation and development. I agree with you that the people involved need to be carefully trained if this is to be a useful model.
Thanks, Bob.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Bret L Simmons, Yancey Thomas. Yancey Thomas said: Leadership Caffeine: Time to Take out the 360-Degree Trash … http://bit.ly/gle5Fy […]
Art, As a purveyor of 360 instruments, I’d definitely like to speak for what they DO. In effect, they provide a platform for conversation – between the leader and directs, boss, peers, customers, etc. Although I do agree that most of the electronic instruments are way to general to be useful – when combined with a skillful debrief (usually HR or a consultant), stakeholder interviews (sometimes done by a consultant or coach) and the conversations mentioned, they can be a powerful motivating force for taking action on new behaviors.
I agree with much of what you say – its unfortunate that the proper use of these instruments and the associated feedback and action planning is expensive. Many organizations are unwilling to pay for this, resulting in a bad experience. I was one of those in a past life who had a bad experience (or several actually) with 360 instruments. It taught me how to do them right, and I refuse to do anything less of “right” when it comes to these instruments.
Thanks for a thought-provoking post, as always.
Mary Jo, if only I’d have known about the “purveyor” in you…all those collaborative posts out the window! : ) My hope is that the skillful debrief is follows a careful and thoughtful input phase from some people that do take it seriously. I have no doubt that your clients gain tremendously from your wisdom! Thanks for sharing your thoughts and for delicately telling me I’m a “chucklehead.” Your friend, -Art
I work for a company that designs 360 tools and have seen how they can be extremely transformational and inspiring – I have also seen other companies out there who have designed a 360 with absolutely no thought into design and validation. There is a lot of useful information on how to choose a 360 and what should be involved in a worthwhile 360 on our blog which may help you understand how a 360 can help organisations and individuals if done correctly……http://snipurl.com/1lwx2b
Stephanie, thanks for sharing the vendor’s perspective. I’m all for the transformational and inspiring part. Best, -Art
Art, good thoughts…particularly, since you didn’t throw the entire 360 process out with the trash. I like to make a distinction between the design of the system, and the purpose of the system. As a coach, I have found that peer or subordinate feedback (quality) to be irreplaceable in a few cases where the senior individual did not have all the awareness they needed to.
Like you, I have certainly seen my share of 360’s that were fraught with lack of quality in the information and/or lack of quality in the administration. Many of my attitudes would echo Mary Jo’s. I’d rather fix the system than believe the system was inherently flawed.
Jim
Thanks, Jim. While I’m more Demingesque in my views here than in favor of much of what we call performance evaluation, I’m on record (in spite of my controversial post title!) in support of this done properly instead of mechanically and vaguely. Best, -Art
Art, nice post. I also agree with the need for review improvement. I put this in the category of if you don’t exercise those muscles they atrophy. Because the review process for most companies is an annual exercise any meaningful feedback is lost because of its untimely nature. Additionally, because we are not giving formal feedback it is tougher and more time consuming to do so.
It was a coincidence that I also came across a write up about how Atlassian is addressing this shortfall in the HR process. http://www.managementexchange.com/story/atlassians-big-experiment-performance-reviews I thought I would pass it along since you might find it of interest. I know I did and will be following their results.
Thanks, Larry for adding your insight and for sharing the link. Heading there right now. -Art
Agree totally. The very last page 475 of my ancient book on Performance Management ended with a critique of peer review processes. I had excluded those methods/forms from my coverage as dangerous or typically defective. While wonderfully valuable for personal development, 360 systems easily become cop-outs for supervisors afraid to manage, popularity contests, political events or delusional exercises in which the raters have no idea what actual outcomes the performer is employer to produce. They are not always bad, but too frequently are..