As today’s businesses continue to expand, workers are expected to perform well on their jobs. This is what truly happened to management who has a tendency to measure how well they are doing on their job. The job done in a certain period of time is frequently evaluated by performance appraisal. Performance appraisals lead to enhancing employee’s performance, internal communication (relationship), and quality improvements as well. Some experts argue that formal performance appraisal is somewhat useless and many of them contemplate performance appraisals can be detrimental to quality improvement and convey some negative perceptions to the management (David Law, 2007). Albeit many professionals pointed out disadvantages associated with using performance appraisal, I contemplate that its benefits outweigh drawbacks. As such, a 360-degree feedback is one of the numerous examples of performance evaluation methods. Performance appraisals can be used to measure one’s job performance with feedback from subordinates, peers, and managers in the organization, so that everyone in the particular organization knows what and where he or she needs to improve. In addition, well-scheduled 360-degree feedbacks lead to positive changes in worker’s job satisfaction and enhance the company’s effort to attain its own interest. The stable encouragement of the effects of performance appraisal has a variety of short-term and long-term consequences including improved job performance, harmonious interpersonal relationships (superiors and subordinates), and as well as advanced quality management (continuous improvement) within organizations.
The 360-degree feedback was initially used by the U.S. Armed Forces to support development of its staff in the 1940’s. Later on Clark Wilson from the University of Bridgeport (Connecticut) developed the first 360-degree feedback survey instruments for management development and it has been used and studied since 1973 (www.performanceprograms.com). Valuable factors
A 360-degree feedback offers a variety of remarkably potential benefits. According to Stephane Brutus et al. (2006), all of the following benefits have been applied to six different countries in distinct functions, such as: accounting, finance, manufacturing, and many other primary departments. •
Individuals get a broader perspective of how they are perceived by others than previously possible. It indicates that awareness of and relevance of competencies in workers’ psyche will continue to increase over time. At this point, management should be aware that they too have development needs that are crucial for the whole organization. Once this step has been applied, employees would next give more reliable feedback to managers about their performance. I believe this method could be seen as a win-win situation which is beneficial for both workers and management. •
Encouraging more open feedback — new insights.
It indicates that reinforcing the desired competencies of the business requires a clearer picture to senior management of individual’s real worth. A 360-degree feedback clarifies the employee’s critical performance aspects because open feedback gives people a more rounded view of performance than they had previously. •
Identifying key development areas for the individual, a department and the organization as a whole. Individuals’ strengths can be used to the best advantage of the business. A rounded view of the individual’s/ team’s/ organization’s performance determines appropriately strengths and weaknesses in business environment. Therefore, the self-awareness of managers will have personally impact upon subordinates. •
Supporting a climate of continuous improvement.
Starting to improve the climate/ morale will be measured through the survey. Management should focus on agenda and discuss for development based upon the collected 360-degree feedback. Goals and objectives of 360-degree feedback
References: Angelucci, Patricia. (2000). Cultural diversity: health belief systems. Nursing Management Journal, 7-8.
Brutus, Stephane et al. (2006). Internationalization of multi-source feedback systems: a six-country exploratory analysis of 360- degree feedback. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1888-1906.
Evans, A. (2001). From every angle. Training, 38 (9), 22.
Garbett, Robert. (2007). Developing a qualitative approach to 360-degree feedback to aid understanding and development of clinical expertise. Journal of Nursing Management, 342-347.
Gillespie, Treena L. (2005). Internationalizing 360-degree feedback: are subordinate ratings comparable? Journal of Business and Psychology, 361-382.
Huet-Cox, G.D., Nielsen T.M., & Sundstrom, E. (1999, May). Get the most from 360-degree feedback: put it on the internet. HR Magazine, 92-103.
Law, David R. (2007). Appraising performance appraisals: a critical look at an external control management technique. International Journal of Reality Therapy, 35-47.
Levine, Marcie. (2003). 3600 assessments-where do I start? Survey Connect Inc, 1-4.
Loup, R., & Koller, R
Pearce, Chris. (2007). Ten steps to conducting appraisals. Nursing Management Journal, 21.
Porter, Michael E., Takeuchi, Hirotaka & Sakakibara, Mariko
Pryor, Mildred G., White, J. Chris & Toombs, Leslie A. (1998). Strategic Quality Management. Thomson Learning.
Senge, Peter M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization (1st ed.). New York: Doubleday.
Wright, Robert F. (2000). Strategies for avoiding the micro management trap. Journal of Management Decision, 362-364.
Yang, Jin-Shan, & Pan, Jason Chao-Hsien. (2004). Just-in-time purchasing: an integrated inventory model involving deterministic variable lead time and quality improvement investment. International Journal of Production Research, 853-863.
Yusof, Sha’ri Mohd & Aspinwall, Elaine. (2000). Total quality management implementation frameworks: comparison and review. Journal of Total Quality Management, 281-294.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document