• We strongly recommended that 360 feedback be used only for developmental purposes and that the actual scores remain confidential to the participant. This recommendation precludes use of 360 feedback for performance appraisal. The only exception is the case of succession planning projects, where sharing of data is voluntary. In these situations, the participants know in advance their results will be reviewed by a combination of human resource specialists, upper management and their own managers.
• The pressure to use multi-rater feedback for various performance management applications is partly due to the poor quality and inconsistent execution of conventional appraisal systems. Yet even in organizations where these systems are administered well, there are still those who recommend that multi-rater feedback surveys be used for appraisal. Management and human resource professionals, impressed with the strong psychometric standards of surveys such as the Task Cycle instruments, want to bring that precision into the appraisal process. Another set of reasons has to do with accountability. It is sometimes thought that if the 360 feedback results are more public, or at least shared with the person’s manager, the participant will be forced to improve performance.
• Those of us on the side of “development-only” warn of all sorts of dangers inherent in changing the privacy rule and adding appraisal to the list of applications. For one, there is the danger that employees will “game the system”. This not only destroys the appraisal process, it also impacts the norms. “Grade inflation” is one consequence. Yet even more serious is the loss of the usefulness of multi-rater feedback surveys. When the scores become meaningless, so does the feedback.

• Multi-rater feedback excels at identifying perceptions of behaviors — both the individual’s self-perceptions and the perceptions of others–as they relate to role-specific core competencies. Once soft spots and blind spots are identified, training and development can be offered. By the same token, unrealized strengths may be identified and further developed.
• Many organizations have conducted extensive studies in order to article their important, role-specific core competencies. A core competency statement describes the capability required to do a job successfully. Performance Programs is often asked to use those studies to create customized feedback questionnaires. We review each of the competencies for its potential “observability,” seeking the behavioral aspects of each competency. We can then create customized 360 feedback questions that focus on observations of behaviors. Unlike personality, behavior can be changed through training and coaching. The customized 360 feedback questionnaire is often used in conjunction with training and development programs.
• Many core competencies are very similar across organizations and have been studied elsewhere. The Task Cycle® Surveys of the Clark Wilson Group were developed to identify universal core competencies in management, leadership and team roles. They have been validated and shown to predict effectiveness in the roles they measure.
• Whether an organization uses custom-developed 360 or validated 360 such as the Wilson surveys, the combination of competency statements, a 360 questionnaire, and training is a very powerful way to help individuals increase the competencies that matter most.

Core competencies are translated into one or more observable behaviors. The survey designer sorts these behaviors into two categories: ones that can be trained and ones that can’t. Trainable behaviors are good candidates for the survey. If your survey is intended for development, we use only questions relating to these behaviors. Behaviors and characteristics that aren’t likely to be affected by training are typically based on personality, temperament and values. These are generally not good candidates for developmental 360 feedback, but they may have a place in other types of assessments.

If you wish to measure the effectiveness of vision or value statements, they also need to be assessed by questions that reflect a behavior. High scores reflect behavior consistent with the value, low scores reflect inconsistency. Group composites, showing how well groups of employees actually “live the values” are very useful springboards for training and executive discussion.

Customized 360 feedback is usually not validated. However, an organization can obtain validated items or groups of items to create a hybrid survey. For validated competencies, the Task Cycle® Surveys from The Clark Wilson Group are an excellent source. If your organization’s competencies match part or all of these, you can capitalize on this research by adding them to your custom 360 feedback questionnaire.

Also, you may wish to access questionnaire items that have norms for a similar employee population. Many core competencies are very similar across organizations and have been studied elsewhere. You may be able to obtain scales that have been validated on published surveys from Clark Wilson Group.

Most individual assessments used in business fit four categories. All are discussed below. Performance Programs offers products in all categories.

1)  Assessments of process-based competencies

Most published or customized 360 feedback surveys are assessments of process-based competencies. These surveys are usually designed to illuminate areas that people can change through training and development and they avoid issues of personality, temperament or values.

Typical items on a 360 feedback survey might include:

• “This individual tries new things for improvement.” (rate from “never” to “always”)
• “This individual expresses appreciation for people’s efforts.” (rate from “never” to “always”)
• “This individual adapts readily to new team members.” (rate from “never” to “always”)
• The point of 360 feedback is for the individual to become aware of competencies and soft spots (or blind spots) so they can develop appropriate skills and behaviors for greater effectiveness in a role. Designers of these instruments strive to identify skills that distinguish between high and low performers in designated roles. Clark Wilson Group’s Task Cycle Surveys are an excellent example. History of the Task Cycle Theory, first of their kind.

2)  Personality Tests & Inventories

The name “personality test” is used loosely, covering everything from fun questionnaires on the Internet to serious tests that detect mental pathology or, in the case of job personality tests, how well suited a person is to a particular job. So, it is important to make some distinctions.

Many famous personality tests, such as Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and the California Psychological Inventory (CPI) were designed for a clinical context. Clinical instruments usually are not appropriate for career counseling or development because they detect psychopathology, and many ask questions that are not appropriate to a business situation. (However, clinical tests are used when the applicant’s state of mind is important. Pilots, military Special Forces, law enforcement officers, or nuclear power plant operators are examples.)
The second type of personality test looks at how we believe we are known by others based on our observable behaviors. These instruments ask respondents to check off or rate items that best describe themselves as they would react under various circumstances.

Sample statements might include these:

• “My success depends on how others see me.”
• “I am careful to consider the other person’s point of view.”
• “Many of the managers I’ve worked for were incompetent.”
• “I like being in front of a group.”
• For training purposes, self-assessments do not give the information needed to guide changes in behavior. This is why it is often useful to combine personality assessment with 360 feedback.
• Performance Programs offers an array of personality reports based on the Hogan Personality Inventory and Hogan Development Survey.

3) Measurements of styles and attributes

“Type” or style indicators are, from an assessment perspective, hybrids. They measure personality tendencies but also reflect learning history. The well-known Myers-Briggs Type Indicator fits in this category.

These assessments reveal general characteristics or attributes, and patterns of personality traits. They result in such statements as “John is a participator [or a driver, or an analyst, or a pacesetter].” These give a basis for understanding the dynamics of one’s interactions.

Style assessments generally do not assess role-specific skills or behaviors. They can measure how we change our style of interaction over time, however. While personality tendencies remain essentially the same, style can shift as we learn from experience.

4)  Motives, Values and Interest Questionnaires

Motives, values and interest questionnaires probe how you would like your work life to be and clarify career direction. Many people confuse what they want to do with what they think they should do.

Because actual job performance relies on motives and values, questionnaires of this type can be very useful. These typically ask respondents to rate the importance of job security, salary, the opportunity to display creativity on the job, and many other job-related preferences. They can help clarify, for instance, whether you prefer people contact more than most people, prefer to be in charge or in a supporting role, or whether you are more independent than other people in your field.

Some examples of statements on these questionnaires include the following:

• “I’d like to be famous.”
• “I need to work by myself.”
• “Show me the money.”
• “I love to run things.”
• “I can’t stand working in the same place every day.

Performance Programs offers reports based on the validated Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory from Hogan Assessments.

Why do you want to use 360 degree feedback surveys? Some common reasons include:

• Executive assessment and development
• Succession planning
• Core competency assessment for specific roles
• Skill development for new supervisors, managers, team leaders and executives
• Team development
• Consultative and service skills development

What outcome are you hoping to achieve with 360? Some common goals include:

• Enhanced leadership & vision
• Organizational bench strength
• Adaptability to rapid change
• Up-leveling individuals to new roles
• Increased team commitment

Have you conducted a 360 survey before? Administrative considerations:

• How many different locations?
• How many different languages?
• Do you have a preference for how the survey will be administered?
  • Internet
  • Mailed to home or office
  • E-mail

How will feedback be delivered and reinforced effectively? Some common methods include the following:

• Through trained feedback providers
• In conjunction with training
• In conjunction with individual coaching
• Linked with performance appraisal
• Time 1, Time 2 cycles to track and illustrate improvements
• Through individual coaching sessions
• During training

How well positioned are you to help feedback recipients take action on the resulting data?

• How many employees in your organization will be given feedback?
• Do you plan on repeating the feedback process at a later date to determine progress?