Multi-rater feedback can raise more questions than it answers. How is an employee to react, for example, when his manager gives a participant negative ratings, while feedback from direct reports and peers is laudatory? Research suggests that disagreement between rater groups is common and that the resulting confusion creates challenges for employee development.

The strength of 360-degree feedback is that it reflects the varying perspectives of different rater groups. That's also part of the problem. What one group views as effective behavior, another group may see as problematic.

And, each rater group brings natural biases to the table. For example, studies conducted by Envisia Learning, Inc. find that supervisor feedback tends to be based on bottom-line results (are tasks completed on time and well?), technical competence and whether an employee's behavior draws complaints from colleagues or clients.

By contrast, direct reports base their reviews on factors such as willingness to involve the direct report in decisions, interest in a direct report's professional development and trustworthiness.

Peers, who lack perspective on their colleagues' day-to-day performance, tend to focus on leadership potential. Their remarks often reflect opinions on whether the participant has the "right stuff" to motivate and create a compelling vision for others to follow.

None of these perspectives is wrong, and all of these insights can be valuable in creating a 360-degree view of performance. However, it's important that the person being reviewed and his supervisors understand how the "filters" used by different groups affect how they rate performance.

The major goal of 360-degree feedback interventions is to facilitate purposeful individual or team behavior change. Successful behavior change at the individual or team level requires three necessary conditions:

1. Awareness/Insight;
2. Motivation/Self-Efficacy; and
3. Ability.

When properly designed and implemented, multi-rater or 360-degree feedback interventions provide specific feedback to enhance self-insight and self-awareness necessary for any potential behavior change. However, without sufficient motivation and self-efficacy, most behavior change efforts are largely unsuccessful. Effective 360-degree feedback interventions enhance the motivation levels of individuals and teams to make constructive behavior changes to meet the needs of both internal and external stakeholders (e.g., customers, direct reports, team members, etc.).

Multi-rater or 360-degree feedback interventions involve the systematic collection of specific information from multiple sources to enhance awareness of individuals and teams. Most commonly, data and information are collected from multiple sources that have a relevant, and hopefully accurate, perspective to share using focus group, interview, or paper-and-pencil instruments. The data collected are commonly summarized quantitatively and/or qualitatively and shared with one or more members of the organization in an oral and/or written manner. The most common form of multi-rater or 360-degree feedback interventions today typically utilizes an off-the-shelf or in-house designed instrument measuring critical competencies required for competitive performance. Most feedback from these interventions is collected from multiple perspectives (e.g., one's supervisor, direct reports, peers, team members) and is summarized in the form of a written and/or computerized feedback report (often including graphic comparisons of self-other perceptions, written comments, and narrative information). The most common uses of multi-rater or 360-degree feedback interventions include: Executive/management coaching, training and development, career counseling, succession planning and development, training needs assessment, training evaluation, and performance appraisal and evaluation.

Despite the growing popularity of multi-rater of 360-degree feedback, a number of issues emerge in the use and implementation of such organizational interventions. These include such things as:

What competencies should be assessed and measured?
How many individuals ensure a reliable and valid set of observations about another individual?
Who should provide feedback?
How should raters be selected?
Should 360-degree feedback be used for development or appraisal purposes?
Should individuals providing feedback be identified?
The chapter includes a real-world case study and answers to the current issues and questions regarding best practices in the use of 360-degree feedback interventions. References are also provided for additional readings in the multi-rater or 360-degree feedback literature.
 

In recent years "360-degree feedback" (multi-rater feedback) has become a popular tool for helping executives develop. How can you design and implement a 360-degree assessment and feedback intervention that will create maximum value for the individual and organization? This article discusses seven critical guidelines to help you get the most from any 360-degree assessment and feedback intervention.

The guidelines discussed include:

1. Defining and communicating a clear purpose
 
2. Starting at the top of the organization
 
3. Having an open mind to feedback and a willingness to change behavior
 
4. Conducting a pilot test in your organization
 
5. Communicate with all program participants and those involved in the 360-degree feedback process

6. Safeguarding confidentiality
 
7. Evaluating your 360-degree process.

Specific suggestions and strategies are presented and discussed.

The Center for Creative Leadership, a non-profit educational institution, conducted a survey of multi-rater instruments that give feedback to managers. This publication includes descriptions of 360-degree assessment instruments that meet the following criteria: 1. Publicly available
2. Provide multi-rater feedback
3.Have managers/leaders as a target audience
4. Have a scaling method that permits assessment of a subject along a psychological continuum
5. Conforms to APA/AERA/NCME Standards which makes the psychometric information available to potential users including scale development, administration/scoring, intended uses, appropriate populations, norms, reliability & validity information, and cautions about probable misuses, misinterpretations, and adverse, unintended consequences of using the test.
 
This publication describes the multi-rater instrument developed and published by Envisia Learning, Inc., Manager View/360. By comparing one's perception with those of peers, direct reports and one's manager, Manager View/360 provides an objective summary of your employee's strengths and areas of development along twenty competencies required for competitive performance. Manager View/360 is suitable for supervisory training, management development, training needs assessment, career development, and training evaluation.
Scales:

COMMUNICATION
Listening, Two-Way Feedback, Oral Communication, Written Communication, Presentation, Vision/Goal Setting

TASK MANAGEMENT
Planning/Organizing, Delegation, Administrative Control/Follow-Up, Team Building, Performance Evaluation, Performance Management

INTERPERSONAL/TEAM
Rewarding/Recognizing Performance, Interpersonal Sensitivity, Negotiation/Conflict Management, Coaching/Development, Leadership/Influence, Employee Involvement

PROBLEM SOLVING
Strategic Problem-Analysis, and Decisiveness/Judgment