What’s the Use?
360⁰ Surveys can be a valuable tool for collecting and sharing constructive feedback for leaders. Like any tool, it needs to be used properly. With improper, misinformed use, you can defeat the purpose of the tool.
Most often, 360⁰ feedback will include direct feedback from an employee’s subordinates, peers (colleagues), and supervisor(s), as well as a self-evaluation. It can also include, in some cases, feedback from external sources, such as customers and suppliers or other interested stakeholders. It may be contrasted with “upward feedback,” where managers are given feedback only by their direct reports, or a “traditional performance appraisal,” where the employees are most often reviewed only by their managers. – Wikipedia
Why 360 Surveys?
I believe that
constructive feedback is the Breakfast of Champions. No matter how skilled or accomplished we are, we all have blind spots. So, 360⁰ feedback can be like
Amazing Grace; you once were lost (or unaware) now you’ve found (new areas to improve). Any positive change begins with
awareness. Constructive feedback insight can:
- Be productively humbling
- Uncover blind spots and enhance awareness
- Result in a commitment to positive change and development
- Eliminate productivity obstacles
The important adjective here is “constructive”. If feedback is presented or perceived as diminishing, it will likely be a waste of time and resources.
The Key Assumptions and Flaws
360⁰ Feedback is typically gathered with anonymous internet surveys. Ideally, the anonymity feature is to promote candor by eliminating any fear of retribution that survey respondents might have. What are the assumptions here?
- The best way to gain candor is with a witness protection program.
- When names are disconnected from comments, the feedback recipient will be unable to recognize their source and will be uninterested in responding directly.
- The feedback will be recognized and perceived as an opportunity for professional growth and development
Let’s consider these three. Are they really valid assumptions?
Assumption 1: We Need Witness Protection
Why can’t we be transparent when sharing candid performance/feedback information? Is it possible that anonymity is a Band-Aid approach to a larger issue? Let’s remember that our feedback recipients are human beings that are more than capable of defeating their own purposes. So, constructive feedback should be valued, welcomed. When that occurs the results from that insight can be
amazing. But if we have to allow people to shoot while under cover, might it be time to examine the system that has created that need? Why can’t people have candid discussions about self improvement without protecting their identity?All too often, it’s simply
not possible or feasible to collect feedback without anonymous surveys (a.k.a. witness protection). Survey insight can still be valuable. I have learned to examine all options for collecting the information before recommending or implementing the anonymous survey approach. I’ve learned to at least ask: Why can’t we share information with face-to-face conversations?
Assumption 2: Full Anonymity is Easily Achieved
All too often, 360⁰ surveys turn into a game of connecting the comments with the people. The sample size of a typical survey is small enough to make assumptions to connect people to their comments and ratings. Even when connection isn’t clear, insecure leaders tend to focus more on
wondering who than accepting constructive insight.With the wrong intent, survey participants can act as snipers and use the survey as an opportunity to pursue a vindictive agenda. When that occurs, more energy and attention is expended with the identity game than the feedback itself.
Assumption 3: “I’m from HR and I’m here to help.”
If constructive feedback isn’t welcomed, the process can do more harm than good. How does the feedback process create a
win for the leader? How well is that “win” communicated and understood? What are the possibilities that someone could lose? Will the feedback be used for performance appraisal? If so, will negative comments be perceived as sabotage? Is the survey process serving to build trust, or erode it? If the process is damaging trust within a team or organization, is the survey feedback really worth it?
The Feedback Challenge
How will you create an environment where continuous professional improvement is universally supported…..a place where anonymity is
not a prerequisite for candor? When people play the game of
hide and snipe, everybody
loses.
Related Articles
Most often, 360