360‐Degree Feedback

Citation

Hannabuss, S. (1998), "360‐Degree Feedback", Library Review, Vol. 47 No. 8, pp. 405-406. https://doi.org/10.1108/lr.1998.47.8.405.5

Staff appraisal has often been defined as bosses checking the performance of subordinates, and often with pay in mind. Appraisal schemes in information and library services in recent years have emphasised career development and planning, how self‐aware managers are of their impact on other people. The importance of team skills (like delegating, empowerment, and managing diversity) has meant more attention to what other members of teams think of the manager ‐ peers and colleagues, customers and suppliers.

It is natural, therefore, for 360‐degree (or multi‐rater, all‐round, upwards) feedback to have evolved. Ward, a training manager with experience at Chrysler and Austin Rover, Tesco and Coca‐Cola, and now a partner at Ward Dutton Partnership, defines 360‐degree feedback as “the systematic collection and feedback of performance data on an individual or group derived from a number of the stakeholders in their performance”. This type of appraisal is widely used in modern organisations, as revealing case studies (on the AA, ARCO Oil, Total, the IT company PRC, and the London Borough of Croydon) demonstrate. It is both a symptom of changing organizational culture and a catalyst for it. Like any appraisal change, it should not be introduced too quickly: perceived threats, conflict, bias, cynicism all work against its successful implementation. Yet Ward suggests that of all the methods of appraisal ‐ employee surveys, ability tests, personality inventories, performance appraisal, development centres and the rest (he describes these) ‐ 360‐degree feedback is likely to be the best for self‐developing managers in a teambuilding culture.

It does need careful introduction: familiarisation, piloting, defining roles and responsibilities, comparing best practice. Ward argues that, for organisations keen to develop in their managers leadership competencies like initiative and creativity and risk‐taking, this is the way ahead. He provides useful chapters on practicalities (designing the system in‐house or customising off‐the‐peg schemes, making sure it is valid and reliable, organising and analysing the data, which can be very considerable, ensuring the “fit” with a management style which is more facilitator and mentor than hierarchical boss). The link between appraisal and organisational strategy and quality has never been closer.

Managers in information and library services will find this work ‐ and the whole series from IPD (there are others on benchmarking, project management, job evaluation, recruitment and selection) ‐ topical, sensible and informed, alerting us to what it means and involves. 360‐Degree Feedback provides busy managers with a quick update on trends in appraisal generally, although the radical shift in cultural and managerial assumptions implied in this approach will make it threatening for top‐down organisations and for managers concerned about the proliferation of data which, if in paper form, might overwhelm the task and, if electronic, might be elusive to understand and lack confidentiality. But the trend is there and it is really worth sorting out how to deal with it.