360 feedback acceptability: Exploring ratee attributes

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alma McCarthy ◽  
Thomas N. Garavan
Keyword(s):  
360 Feedback

Gender Differences in Importance Ratings in 360 Feedback Surveys

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Roberto ◽  
Celesta Taylor ◽  
Ashleigh Schwab ◽  
Lloyd Lin ◽  
Taylor Paige Drummond ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
360 Feedback ◽  
Importance Ratings

The Legal Environment for 360 Feedback

2019 ◽  
pp. 479-502
Author(s):  
John C. Scott ◽  
Justin M. Scott ◽  
Katey E. Foster
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Performance Management ◽  
Succession Planning ◽  
Talent Management ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Feedback Process ◽  
Perceived Fairness ◽  
Selection Procedures ◽  
360 Feedback ◽  
Management Processes

Many organizations rely on 360 Feedback to drive their strategic talent agendas. Even when 360 is purposed for development only, organizations are frequently reluctant to limit it to this use. The 360 data represent unique input that informs several talent management processes, from high-potential identification and promotion to performance management and succession planning. When 360 results are extended beyond development only and affect an employee’s status, however, a host of psychometric standards and legal requirements emerge. Highlighted is a series of considerations, beginning with design limitations as a decision-making tool (i.e., assessing performance while supporting development) and including score equivalence (across languages/cultures) and perceived fairness. After providing an overview of the legal framework of human resource decision-making, it is applied to the 360 Feedback process, including disparate impact, adverse impact, validation, and alternative selection procedures. The chapter concludes with recommendations for 360 practices, from design to implementation to use in making talent management decisions.

What Kind of Talent Do We Have Here?

2019 ◽  
pp. 397-406
Author(s):  
Christine Corbet Boyce ◽  
Beth Linderbaum
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Company ◽  
Business Strategy ◽  
Behavioral Data ◽  
Personality Assessments ◽  
Business Goals ◽  
360 Feedback ◽  
Talent Strategy ◽  
Short And Long Term ◽  
Feedback Data

This chapter describes a global pharmaceutical company that used 360 Feedback and other talent assessments to address critical strategic challenges in its business. The company collected behavioral data on approximately 400 sales leaders as part of a system-wide talent assessment that allowed a newly appointed leader to craft a talent strategy that would support his business strategy. By linking 360 Feedback data, personality assessments and sales results, the organization’s senior leadership team was able to critically examine its system-wide talent profile in the context of its ambitious commercial strategies. This system-wide profile was then used to shape short- and long-term plans for developing talent and shifting the culture at all levels to better align with business goals.

The Journey From Development to Appraisal

2019 ◽  
pp. 327-342
Author(s):  
Tracy M. Maylett
Keyword(s):  
Performance Management ◽  
Performance Appraisal ◽  
Performance Measures ◽  
Past Performance ◽  
360 Feedback ◽  
Objective Performance ◽  
Objective Performance Measures ◽  
Performance Appraisal Process ◽  
Measures Of Performance

This case study describes an initiative to change a long-standing performance management process at a large manufacturing facility within General Mills that emphasized the attainment of objective performance measures (the “what” of performance) to one that also included the “how” of goal achievement. The organization embarked on a 3-year pilot evaluation of the use of 360 Feedback as a possible solution to replace or supplement their traditional single-source (supervisor) performance appraisal process. The two systems ran in parallel using 140 randomly selected employees. Results showed little correlation between the what measures of performance from the traditional appraisals and the how data collected using the 360 Feedback, supporting the view that job performance should be viewed as requiring both aspects of evaluation, using different methods of assessment. Ultimately, the organization maintained both systems but integrated 360 Feedback into the traditional appraisals as well, creating complementary processes that looked “forward” (development) and “past” (performance).

Rater Congruency

2019 ◽  
pp. 291-308
Author(s):  
Adrian Furnham
Keyword(s):  
Direct Reports ◽  
360 Feedback ◽  
History Of ◽  
Rating Agreement

This chapter explores the meaning of, and implications for, differences in 360 Feedback ratings among individual raters (e.g., self, peers, direct reports). This chapter looks at possible causes and consequences for high and low agreement and why it is important. A detailed discussion of the history of rating difference research is followed by an analysis of these differences. This chapter addresses a number of issues related to congruity in feedback ratings: What is rater congruence? Why does it matter? Is it mainly due to people overrating themselves? What are the business implications for high or low congruence? What are the recommendations to increase it? The importance of self-other rating agreement in 360 Feedback is discussed.

Strategic 360 Feedback for Organization Development

2019 ◽  
pp. 213-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan H. Church ◽  
W. Warner Burke
Keyword(s):  
Transformational Leadership ◽  
Human Resources ◽  
Organization Development ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Model Case ◽  
Case Examples ◽  
Current State ◽  
360 Feedback ◽  
Organizational Framework ◽  
Using Data

This chapter focuses on the application of Strategic 360 Feedback specifically for large-scale organization development (OD) and change interventions. The emphasis is on (a) ways in which using data-based feedback for OD efforts is similar to and different from other applications and (b) the origins, evolution, and current state of the method as a key tool for OD practitioners. The chapter begins with an overview of the role and key differentiators of strategic 360 Feedback for OD and change-related interventions. Following a discussion of the importance of linking the process to a broader strategic organizational framework such as the Burke–Litwin model, case examples are provided for using 360 Feedback as either a transactional (managerial) or a transformational (leadership) lever for change. The chapter concludes with summary observations about the evolution and potential future of 360 Feedback for OD interventions, with an emphasis on trends in technology and the digitization of human resources.

What Is “Strategic 360 Feedback”?

2019 ◽  
pp. 11-16
Author(s):  
David W. Bracken
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Behavior Change ◽  
Performance Management ◽  
Talent Management ◽  
Sustainable Change ◽  
360 Feedback ◽  
Feedback Culture ◽  
Management Processes ◽  
Management And Development ◽  
The Creation

Strategic 360 Feedback is defined as (a) having content derived from the organization’s strategy and values; (b) creating data that are sufficiently reliable and valid to be used for decision-making for talent management purposes; (c) being integrated into talent management, performance management, and development systems; and (d) being inclusive of all candidates for assessment. When these conditions are satisfied, Strategic 360 Feedback processes can create sustainable change in behaviors valued by the organization, create behavior change in key leaders, inform decisions integral to organization-wide talent management processes, and support the creation and maintenance of a feedback culture. All multirater processes should be developmental, and Strategic 360 Feedback in no way precludes its use for development purposes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document