HR case study
BEST PRACTICE
Getting
360
Feedback
Right
by MauryA. Peiperl
360-degree feedback is all the rage in companies big and small. But it is frequently bureaucratic, politically charged, and agonizing. The good news is that by understanding four paradoxes inherent to peer appraisal, managers can take some of the pain out of the process-and get better results in.
IF A SINGLE E-MAIL
can send the pulse racing, it's the one from human resources announcing that it's time for another round of
360-degree feedback.
In and of itself, this type of appraisal isn't bad. Indeed, many businesspeople would argue that over the past decade, it has revolutionized performance management-for the better. But one aspect of 360-degree feedback consistently stymies executives: peer appraisal. More times than not, it
142
exacerbates bureaucracy, heightens political tensions, and consumes enormous numbers of hours. No wonder so many executives wonder if peer appraisal is worth the effort.
I wotild argue that it is. Peer appraisal, when conducted effectively, can bolster the overall impact of 360-degree feedback and is as important as feedback from superiors and subordinates. Yet the question remains: can peer appraisal take place without negative side effects?
The answer is yes-if executives tinderstand and manage around four inherent paradoxes.
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW
For the past ten years, my research has focused on the theory behind, and practice of, 360-degree feedback. Most recently, I studied its implementation at
17 companies varying in size - from startups of a few dozen people to Fortune
500 firms-and industry-from hightech manufacturing to professional services firms. I was looking for answers to several questions. Under what circumstances does peer appraisal improve performance? Why does peer appraisal
forward thinking and a deeper understanding of their dynamics, ease the discomfort. Let's consider each paradox in
Getting
360
Feedback
Right
by MauryA. Peiperl
360-degree feedback is all the rage in companies big and small. But it is frequently bureaucratic, politically charged, and agonizing. The good news is that by understanding four paradoxes inherent to peer appraisal, managers can take some of the pain out of the process-and get better results in.
IF A SINGLE E-MAIL
can send the pulse racing, it's the one from human resources announcing that it's time for another round of
360-degree feedback.
In and of itself, this type of appraisal isn't bad. Indeed, many businesspeople would argue that over the past decade, it has revolutionized performance management-for the better. But one aspect of 360-degree feedback consistently stymies executives: peer appraisal. More times than not, it
142
exacerbates bureaucracy, heightens political tensions, and consumes enormous numbers of hours. No wonder so many executives wonder if peer appraisal is worth the effort.
I wotild argue that it is. Peer appraisal, when conducted effectively, can bolster the overall impact of 360-degree feedback and is as important as feedback from superiors and subordinates. Yet the question remains: can peer appraisal take place without negative side effects?
The answer is yes-if executives tinderstand and manage around four inherent paradoxes.
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW
For the past ten years, my research has focused on the theory behind, and practice of, 360-degree feedback. Most recently, I studied its implementation at
17 companies varying in size - from startups of a few dozen people to Fortune
500 firms-and industry-from hightech manufacturing to professional services firms. I was looking for answers to several questions. Under what circumstances does peer appraisal improve performance? Why does peer appraisal
forward thinking and a deeper understanding of their dynamics, ease the discomfort. Let's consider each paradox in