What follows is my take on why 360 feedback is in the disillsion phase of HR fads already. Enjoy :-)
There are too many poorly informed corporate consumers of leadership development programs, and too many hucksters parading themselves as consultants on leadership development.
So says Dr. Frank Shipper, professor of management at Salisbury State University in Salisbury, MD.
"That is a recipe for disaster," says Shipper. He has worked for more than a decade on "360-degree feedback," a management tool where supervisors learn their limitations from none other than their own employees. Using the feedback, which is kept anonymous, supervisors are then encouraged to seek training and resolve their deficiencies.
Shipper notes that "360-degree feedback" is considered the most recent fad in leadership training but it is over 25 years old. It is, however, difficult to find companies that have used it for more than five years.
"The disillusionment phase has already set in on this management fad because, like most others, managers are looking for a quick fix and when that does not result, disappointment sets in," says Shipper. "What could have been an effective management tool became just another program. When an organization wisely adopts, adapts and persists in 360-degree feedback, strong positive results can and have been obtained."
Shipper cautions companies that too many hucksters are parading themselves as consultants on leadership development. For example, the Center for Creative Leadership reviewed 40 feedback instruments in 1991 and found only 16 that met basic psychometric properties.
"Today, the number of different 360-degree feedback instruments being sold has grown, but few have validated results. The corporate consumers should be aware of what those instruments are and adopt them as a first step to ensuring that they are not beginning another short-lived program," says Shipper.
Many consultants are selling "360-degree feedback" as if it is all a company needs. It must be followed up with training and other forms of developmental support, says Shipper.
When applied properly, the survey-like tool encourages supervisors to keep their skills current with their responsibilities. In a corporate environment, that means balancing interactive "people" skills with task-oriented skills such as production planning and cycle time. Often, supervisors focus on their task-ordinated skills and let their people skills wither. This often blinds them to productivity-building ideas from employees and impedes team-building.
Controlling skills are another key aspect of the effective manager. Many supervisors never learn how to guide wayward employees, which interferes with their ability to lead. According to Shipper, regaining control is vital, especially when you consider the cost of production delays and wasted time and materials. Even more damaging is the lost productivity, morale and commitment of good employees when they see that wayward employees do not receive consequences.
"When control is done well," Shipper says, "It improves productivity, reduces tension and increases the commitment of people to their organizations. Things get out of harmony when management fails to interact with people who are out of step."
According to Shipper, supervisors who know follow-up surveys will be made take training more seriously than those that don't. Nevertheless, he recommends companies use the survey as a learning tool and not as a personnel evaluation form for a manager's personnel file.
He co-authored a study, "A Study of the Impact of Training in a Management Development Program Based on 360 Feedback," which appears in the January 1998 issue of The Journal of Managerial Psychology.