A Performance Management Initiative
This blog post is to define and explain what a 360 degree performance feedback plan is. Is the 360 degree method a valid way to evaluate performance? This, and more will be answered by examining the pros and cons related to the value of multi-source evaluations and the effect on employee performance.
First, since this a blog posting and not a formal assignment, I must say that until now, I had not heard of the 360 degree multi-source evaluation and I am curious about what it is. Heathfied (n.d) stated in an article that examined the 360 degree performance plan, that it is a performance plan that allows for feedback from multiple persons instead of the traditional manager-employee, one on one evaluation. Instead, those that manage the employee, their coworkers, and others such as clients, evaluate the employee’s performance. Those that are selected are given a set of standardized, well defined set of questions and asked to evaluate a particular employee. The employees that will rate this person are selected because they work closely together with this employee and possibly see them at their best and worst. The overall purpose of this plan according to Heathfied is that when employees evaluate each other, good things happen. Teamwork is created, training is identified based on evaluation weakness in performance and whatever is revealed, positive or negative, an employee is responsible for his or her own growth and development and the work enviroment is able to support the training and growth (p. 1). Linman (n.d.) appeared to substantiate Healthfied, when she stated that the purpose of this feedback plan is to “assess[] personal development rather than [give an] evaluation (p. 1).
Based on the above stated introduction, the 360 degree performance plan seems logical and an exciting alternative to traditional review plans, which for the industry that I work in are routine and lack purpose other than to justify raises and or bonuses. However, there are several serious concerns about this plan and one in particular is that this type of plan cannot be implemented without serious preparation. The plan “…must be connected with the overall strategic aims of your organization” (p. 2). If it is linked to compensation as traditional apprasals are, the 360 degree plan is doomed because employees will be hesitant to rate each other for fear of retribution, with the subsequent result is the creation of a culture that lacks trust and communication. Linman also stated that the 360 degree plan is popular, but for companies such as IBM, this form of evaluation was stopped due to “[r]eviews had become politically charged and were no longer reliable” (p. 4). If used in a culture that is competitive or hostile, it cannot hope to work as this type of review process takes collaboration and trust so that the evaluation is impartial and fair.
Last, I am not sure that this type of performance evaluation would work in the legal industry as this environment is highly stressed and for the most part, is not supportive of employee growth. Paulina Beautovia.
References
Aguinis, H. (2013). Performance management (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Heathfield, S. (n.d.). 360 Degree Feedback: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. About.com-g Human Resources. Retrieved October 11, 2012, from http://human resources.about.com/od/360feedback/a/360degreefeedback_2
Linman, T. (n.d.). 360-degree Feedback: Weighing the Pros and Cons. Retrieved October 11, 2012, from http://edweb.sdsu.edu/people/arossett/pie/Interventions/360_1
No comments:
Post a Comment