A recent study comparing 18 different selection procedures (and summarising 85 years of research findings) shows peer ratings to be better than most other selection methods in predicting future job performance. For example, peer ratings come out ahead of assessment centres, unstructured interviews, job tryouts, and job knowledge tests [1]. Other research has shown that the validity of results from assessment centres increases if they include peer evaluations [2].
[1] Schmidt & Hunter 1998, Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262-274
[2] Gaugler, Rosenthal, Thornton, & Bentson 1987, Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(3) 493-511
Not necessarily. Many large organisations will already have a "competence framework" which describes the factors that are important to them. Some may even have specific questions (the "behavioural indicators") linked to this framework that can be used in a 360° feedback exercise. If you or your client don't have a suitable framework, I can advise you on using the items developed by the UK Management Charter Initiative.
The Management Charter Initiative (MCI) is the operating arm of the National Forum for Management Education and Development, and is a Registered Charity. With funding from the Department for Education and Employment, MCI has developed National Occupational Standards for Management. These standards form the basis of the UK National Vocational Qualifications (NVQs) in Management, and have been piloted extensively throughout all sectors of the UK economy, before being presented as a detailed set of competencies and behavioural indicators. The standards cover seven major areas of management (e.g. project management, people management, information management). Within each of these seven areas there are a number of competencies (e.g. acting assertively, acting strategically, behaving ethically, building teams), each of which in turn have a number of behavioural indicators that could be used as items in a 360° feedback exercise. You can get more information about the MCI either from me, or direct from MCI at Russell Square House, 10-12 Russell Square, London WC1B 5BZ. 0171 872 9000
Apparently. Over the last 40 years, researchers have addressed this question, but with no clear answer emerging. However, a recent re-analysis of this data shows clear evidence that raters are more lenient if they think the results will be used for assessment rather than just development.
Jawahar & Williams 1997, Personnel Psychology, 50(4), 905-925
There is some evidence to suggest that self ratings of female managers are closer to the ratings given to them by their colleagues than are the self ratings of male managers -- who typically rate themselves more highly than their colleagues rate them.
Fletcher 1997, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 5, 183-187
There doesn't seem to be any clear evidence on this. It has been suggested than in some cultures (e.g. Asia), people may be reluctant to offer honest feedback to superiors, and that they may rate themselves poorly out of a sense of modesty. It seems that more research is needed in this area before reaching any firm conclusions. However, exercise caution if relying on self ratings in a multi-cultural setting…
Well, there are lots of books, but how good they are is another matter. For a readable introduction from a UK perspective, you could try "360 degree feedback" by Peter Ward. For a more general treatment of appraisal and performance management, try "Appraisal", by Clive Fletcher, or "Performance Management" by Armstrong and Baron. All three are published by the Institute of Personnel and Development. Call 0181 263 3387 for ordering information.
© 1999 Dr Tony Gillie
Home Page | 360 degree feedback | Other Services | Contact details