Discussion: View Thread

Dear Stefan,

This is a very interesting and difficult problem that we've wrestled with off-and-on for years.  For your calibration, our environment involves average age 30/five years of work experience MBAs only.  Periodically, we've asked our students in the required OB course to evaluate others.  We've experimented with several ways of doing that.  First, we developed a one page team member feedback form that members of learning teams (who know each other much better because they work together every day for the whole first year) could use to rate/assess/evaluate team members on various dimensions that we chose along with a "keep, lose, add" open ended behavioral section. 

More recently, we've developed a web-based instrument for 360* feedback.  With 65 in each section room, you can see we couldn't ask them all to evaluate all others (or else everyone would be filling out 65 forms-they won't do that), so we limited it to ten others (who would you like to invite to give you feedback).  That meant that the same group of high performers were overwhelmed with requests, so we added a limit in the system that only allowed each person a maximum of ten invites before a message like "please choose someone else" bounced back.  The system calculated the ratings and collected the "keep, lose, add" suggestions, and then sent it all anonymously to the student.  This was STUDENT initiated, that is, if you wanted 360* feedback from peers, you had to ASK for it, not compelled.  We did NOT include these data in our course grades.  Our course grading system has two components, approx on average, 40% on class contributions (recorded by professor daily) and 60% on final exam (typically a case in our system).  We also have a forced curve grading system (which I dislike) which "urges" or adds peer pressure to speak out in class.  Some take it seriously and some respond negatively.  I use a "buy-in" scale with seven elements/descriptive anchors to help people assess how "others" are responding. 

Our experience is that 30 year old MBAs will vehemently resist being required to grade classmates.  Vehemently.  They believe it is the faculty's responsibility to grade them.  Forcing them to do this, in our experience, creates very low level "buy-in" on my scale.  We used the voluntary 360* (which took a couple of years to develop and refine) in a module on performance appraisal along with cases on 360* systems to introduce the whole concept and its various dilemmas (who gets the data, how is it used, etc.).  My experience with consulting clients is varied, some companies do it well, others atrociously. 

So, as the respondent below suggests, I'd be very cautious about compelling anyone to do this.  In my book, Level Three Leadership, I argue that leadership is only leadership when you get a voluntary response.  If you force people to grade each other what you may be teaching may not be what you intended at the outset-but only you can answer that.  We use "cold calls" (calling on people not just volunteers), required attendance, daily class contributions grades (done by each of us after class with either a web-based system or a set of class cards, one for each student), as "pressure" to be prepared.  Students don't like at all being unprepared in front of their peers, so if they don't know who's going to be called on to begin the class or each module of a class (e.g. problem ID, analysis, action), they tend to prepare (even excessively) so as not to be embarrassed/lose face.  "Face" as you know, is not just an Eastern phenomenon. 

Creating a separate peer-grading system to appear on a graduation certificate is a bold move.  I fear it will create animosity among your students, as in war when locals are conscripted to guard countrymen, but I will look for your reports on your outcomes with great interest.

I hope this helps.

Respectfully,

Dear Stefan,

I've experimented with peer-pressure (peer-review) in a multicultural setting and find that it is quite difficult. In some cultures such a system is very well excepted - not so in others. This resulted in evaluation problems.

Pushing people to participate, interact (pressure, as you suggest) sounds a bit anti-learning. You can take the horse to the water - but you can't make it drink.  Pressuring people to participate may result in 'forced' vs. 'learner pulled' participation - i.e. people participating just to get a good grade.

If the problem is participation (at the MBA level), I suggest you review the ways you create individual learner motivation in the programme. For example, you could start the year off with a personalized assessment of leader competencies, have each person develop a development path for the year, and then carfeully explain how each course links to the competencies system.

For the peer evaluation system, you need to develop a way that people take it seriously. The old Captian McWhirr problem may be useful in design.

In any case, you need to create a "truth-telling mechanism".

Food for thought 

De : Management Education and Development Discussion [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.pace.edu] De la part de Stefan Volk
Envoyé : jeudi 10 juillet 2008 19:12
À : MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
Objet : Student peer review system for MBA programs

----

Ce message electronique et tous les fichiers attaches qu'il contient sont confidentiels et destines exclusivement à l'usage de la personne à laquelle ils sont adresses. Si vous avez reçu ce message par erreur, merci de le retourner à son metteur. Les idees et opinions presentees dans ce message sont celles de son auteur, et ne representent pas necessairement celles de l'institution ou entite affiliee dont l'auteur est l'employe. La publication, l'usage, la distribution, l'impression ou la copie non autorisee de ce message et des attachements qu'il contient sont strictement interdits.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please return it to the sender. The ideas and views expressed in this email are solely those of its author, and do not necessarily represent the views of the institution or company of which the author is an employee. Unauthorized publication, use, distribution, printing or copying of this e-mail or any attached files is strictly forbidden.