We recently wanted to do a little "field research". We asked some serious HR executives and consultants the following question:
"Have you experienced a case where you found that a 360 Degree Feedback and a follow up coaching simply didn't provide the longer-term performance tracking that you were looking for?"
The question was ambiguous and broad enough that we weren't surprised at all to receive a wide variety of responses. Nevertheless, there is a common theme!
* * *
So, let's have a look at what some folks had to say.
"In my opinion these feedback systems work when they are not only used as appraisal systems, but as developmental systems as well. Effective 360 feedback systems seem to work better when a manager is engaged in implementing these systems and when the employee is given timely feedback that they can use in goal setting and improving their performance. These systems should be used to reinforce organizational values set forth by the company."
- Anonymous HR
"While 360 Degree Feedback is widely accepted as a critical tool for key HR interventions, many a times it falls short of delivering on the objectives it was destined to achieve. One of the key reasons for this is the credibility of the feedback as perceived by the feedback receiver. Many a times feedback providers are either chosen by the feedback receiver or become known to the feedback receiver through informal communication channels that exist in every organization. Once the curtain over the feedback providers is raised, a smart feedback receiver knows what tone of feedback to expect. In such cases, not only does the feedback receiver become a little indifferent to feedback, but also contributes to the lack of impact of the intervention on his/ her performance tracking/ other program objectives."
- Lakshmi DVS, PHR, SPHR
"I have had experiences where 360s or other similar processes raised the client's awareness, which is itself of real value. I can think of several instances where the clients were just not ready to take the next steps (declare that they wanted to make a specific change and develop practices to develop new habits), and I found myself taking on more responsibility for their change than they did. Good lessons learned for me as coach (particularly when I was in an internal consulting HR role). In hindsight, I recognize many alternate paths I might have taken to better serve my coachee."
- Anonymous HR
"In my experience this can happen if the Manager is not clear in his/her expectations of the employee. You can have great 360 feedback and coaching with mixed signals from the manager. When this happens this sets the employee up for failure. The saying that you "join a company and leave a manager" is very true. In this economic environment I am seeing even less leadership at the management level which unfortunately makes it very difficult for the employees working with that manager to succeed."
- Alanea Kowalski
"Even most of the managers find the 360 Degree Feedback a task and not a development process. But who told us that any manager can act as a coach? Who can say if the manager has the right skills to coach, train, lead and support? This is the question I guess we, HR, should ask ourselves and should never take it as granted. Actually I'm more and more convinced about individual employee initiative for development rather than a company's one, or support coming from his manager!"
- Anonymous HR
* * *
OK, so the big question to ask is, what's the common theme here? Is there one? I think that there is, but I won't spill the beans because I want to hear from you!
Hint: It has something to do with "after" or "the next step".
Posts
2 comments:
Fun stuff! It seems to me that people are locating the shortcomings of these tools in the manager or how the manager handles the projects. I see coaching coming up more than anything else and your 'hint' helps put things in the direction. I'm guessing that what's wrong is that the perception of what these tools can do is off and that too much of the work is left to the tool itself. My experience tells me, like most things in business, that these things are a kind of 'practice' that managers like to do just to say they do them. It looks like they can be valuable if done right. Thank's for the post!
Its the 360 tool itself and the implementation segment. Many do not have them!!!
By the way, HR is not the key here. Senior management has to buy in and sponsor the 360 or its meaningless. Action, not revalation is the important thread and a clear awareness of managers that this is real and changes will be made is also a key thread for success. Doing a 360 is not the key thread at all.
On coaching, first the 360 needs to reveal where a manager is missing a skill or trait that is revealed as needed. A further assessment tool that should be part of the 360 can help them map this and map a way to learn and fuse the needed skill or behavior into their normal management process.
The managers then must commit to defining what they can do to improve and do it. Again, Senior Management mus "require this" or it never happens. Self coachinging tools are again part of a good 360.
Trainer and facilitators, not the managers need to help map this. The reason is not every manager can coach their reportees or even be coached well by their superiors! If they are managers that use processes as management tools, they definately are not suited to be people coaches. Its hard to admit but this is fundamental if a 360 is to be acted on.
Also, you need to trust it, not argue with it. Remember, its not going to give you what you want to hear, its going to give your reality. If you used a 360, you want the reality or why invest?
In today's climate where uncharted and flexible not tried and true is the norm, its also a tool for defining who can work in this new world and needed changes.
Done well, it can reveal that some key people may actually be better suited for other responsibilities, not the ones they have!
As a trainer, I use the insights from a good 360, define what is needed and then personalize training as a development tool and a change manager. You need to see that clarity of needs v strengths clearly from a good 360 or its meaningless as a business management and evelopment tool.
A 360 Is clear and in "real people" language if its any good. Its designed to reveal the reality of how management is perceived and how it is actually doing, not how it thinks it is doing. It's recommendations become a management tool for change, not simply a revelation of whats needed.
There are many associated assessment and implementation tools that also help make a 360a usable tool for everyone in a management position, not just the top tier.
A 360 is kind of meaningles if the info is not actionable, nor sponsored by the CEO or Senior Management as a "we will implement this" directive. If not actionable due to non comittment before hand,if not actionable due to action items and steps missing from the results, your leaders can not gain leadership insights and your leaders and managers can get a change management road map based on the 360.
RSVP to continue the conversation.
Regards, Neil Licht, ANSWERS
answers@ ucanpreventbadhires.com
Post a Comment