This blog is now moved to Bowland Solutions' 360 degree appraisal and performance review blog.
Brendan
Wednesday 3 June 2009
Thursday 31 July 2008
New site for our 360 degree appraisal blog
Together with colleagues at Bowland Solutions we are now putting all of our 360 degree appraisal and performance review blogs together at http://onlineappraisal.compendiumblog.com/blog/bowland-solutions
I hope you will join us on our new blog where we already have some great articles!
Brendan
I hope you will join us on our new blog where we already have some great articles!
Brendan
Monday 4 June 2007
Selecting your own questions
Does one size fit all?
We have been providing 360 degree appraisal systems for 6 or 7 years now. One trend that we have noticed is a move to having recipients have some control over the questions that are asked. At one extreme we have responded to this with a full self service appraisal solution www.myown360.com . But for most of our corporate clients the requirement is to allow the recipient to tailor their questionnaire or simply select the competencies that they should be assessed upon.
We see this as a great development. It assists the process of gaining the recipient's buy-in to their own feedback, reduces the number of questions that are not relevant, and often reduces the overall question count as there is no need for a superset of questions that everyone is asked.
A free-for-all is not the answer of course. Instead, we encourage organisations to set the overall framework - perhaps including some core competencies that are asked of everyone. Optional competencies are then selected from a range designed by HR or with our involvement.
As well as selecting competencies we are also seeing requests to select the questions that are to be asked. For a given competency the company may offer up 6 alternatives with the recipient selecting the 4 they see as most appropriate.
We beleive the benefits of an online 360 degree appraisal system are starting to be realised as the introduction of practices that improve 360 are being introduced at the same time as costs are reduced through a move from a paper-based procedure.
360 degree appraisals from Bowland Solutions
We have been providing 360 degree appraisal systems for 6 or 7 years now. One trend that we have noticed is a move to having recipients have some control over the questions that are asked. At one extreme we have responded to this with a full self service appraisal solution www.myown360.com . But for most of our corporate clients the requirement is to allow the recipient to tailor their questionnaire or simply select the competencies that they should be assessed upon.
We see this as a great development. It assists the process of gaining the recipient's buy-in to their own feedback, reduces the number of questions that are not relevant, and often reduces the overall question count as there is no need for a superset of questions that everyone is asked.
A free-for-all is not the answer of course. Instead, we encourage organisations to set the overall framework - perhaps including some core competencies that are asked of everyone. Optional competencies are then selected from a range designed by HR or with our involvement.
As well as selecting competencies we are also seeing requests to select the questions that are to be asked. For a given competency the company may offer up 6 alternatives with the recipient selecting the 4 they see as most appropriate.
We beleive the benefits of an online 360 degree appraisal system are starting to be realised as the introduction of practices that improve 360 are being introduced at the same time as costs are reduced through a move from a paper-based procedure.
360 degree appraisals from Bowland Solutions
Wednesday 23 May 2007
Online 360 degree appraisals
Online versus paper
As a provider of online 360 degree appraisals it will come as no surprise that we see value in moving the process away from paper-based. If you are having to make the case for an investment in a 360 system then here is a list of what we see as the key benefits. Some obvious, some less so.
Brendan
360 degree appraisals from Bowland Solutions
As a provider of online 360 degree appraisals it will come as no surprise that we see value in moving the process away from paper-based. If you are having to make the case for an investment in a 360 system then here is a list of what we see as the key benefits. Some obvious, some less so.
- Reduced administrative overload - the key reason people approach us
- Flexibility on questionnaires - it is very simple to have subsets of questions for peers compared to direct reports, say. You could do this on paper, but I wouldn't recommend it!
- Able to monitor and chase progress easily
- Higher completion rates. I'm sure someone has worked out why, but people respond to email better than they respond to paper.
- Great flexibility on reporting - and reporting is instant
- Reduced ongoing cost
- Simple routes to get consolidated reports - that analyse strengths and weaknesses over a range of demographic information
- Integrate into your performance review process - or even your course delegate management system.
- Repeating the process is trivial
Brendan
360 degree appraisals from Bowland Solutions
Thursday 10 May 2007
Releasing the report
The big moment
Another client, another day. Today the topic was - when should the recipient get their feedback report and, more importantly, should the manager get to see it first.
For budgetary reasons and straightforward resourcing issues it was not feasible for an external or non-line manager to run the debriefing session and so the question came; should my manager see my 360 degree feedback before I did?
I boldly recommended that the manager should see it first, prepare for the debrief session, and then take the recipient through their feedback during a meeting. But our client was adamant that the recipient should be in control of the process and should not find themselves meeting their manager in the corridor and getting a "you should see what's in your 360" comment.
The ideal is, I believe, that a non-line person gives a debrief and that is the first time the person sees the report. Two key reasons; it allows the report to be understood and it allows a context to be provided. A third consideration is it allows a trained person to observe whether the recipient is emotionally affected by the feedback.
This couldn't happen here. I'm frankly uncertain. I am always nervous of someone reading their report without any assistance on understanding and context. Yet, having the recipient in control of the process is also one of our recommendations.
The client chose to have the recipient remain in control and "release" the report to their manager in advance of the feedback meeting.
Brendan
Find out more about 360 degree appraisal solutions with Bowland Solutions
Another client, another day. Today the topic was - when should the recipient get their feedback report and, more importantly, should the manager get to see it first.
For budgetary reasons and straightforward resourcing issues it was not feasible for an external or non-line manager to run the debriefing session and so the question came; should my manager see my 360 degree feedback before I did?
I boldly recommended that the manager should see it first, prepare for the debrief session, and then take the recipient through their feedback during a meeting. But our client was adamant that the recipient should be in control of the process and should not find themselves meeting their manager in the corridor and getting a "you should see what's in your 360" comment.
The ideal is, I believe, that a non-line person gives a debrief and that is the first time the person sees the report. Two key reasons; it allows the report to be understood and it allows a context to be provided. A third consideration is it allows a trained person to observe whether the recipient is emotionally affected by the feedback.
This couldn't happen here. I'm frankly uncertain. I am always nervous of someone reading their report without any assistance on understanding and context. Yet, having the recipient in control of the process is also one of our recommendations.
The client chose to have the recipient remain in control and "release" the report to their manager in advance of the feedback meeting.
Brendan
Find out more about 360 degree appraisal solutions with Bowland Solutions
Thursday 19 April 2007
Who should pick the respondents in 360 degree feedback
They'll pick their mates!
I've touched on cultural influences on 360 feedback processes before. Who picks the respondents/raters is another classic debate we get into where the organisation's culture drives much of the debate and the answer.
Our baseline position is that the recipient should pick the respondents. They are best placed to understand who can give accurate feedback on themselves and engaging them in the process is crucial to overall success and ensuring a high response rate.
Many clients believe that recipients will pick their mates - pick people who will give them favourable ratings.
The purpose of the 360 will be influential. If there is any link to pay then the 'rating' on the 360 becomes something of value outside of the intrinsic development process. The recipient has an interest in getting high 'scores'. We would recommend avoiding such a link but if it does exist then some form of managerial review of the selected respondents is inevitable.
But, all of our experience is that people approach this from a development perspective - and actively seek balanced feedback - as long as the systems / processes surrounding the 360 are supportive and used for development rather than evaluation. If you see 360 as a long-term process then even those people that in the first year are suspicious and load their selections with favourable colleagues, over time they will move to selecting an appropriate mix of colleagues and direct reports.
Brendan
Find out more about 360 degree appraisal solutions with Bowland Solutions
I've touched on cultural influences on 360 feedback processes before. Who picks the respondents/raters is another classic debate we get into where the organisation's culture drives much of the debate and the answer.
Our baseline position is that the recipient should pick the respondents. They are best placed to understand who can give accurate feedback on themselves and engaging them in the process is crucial to overall success and ensuring a high response rate.
Many clients believe that recipients will pick their mates - pick people who will give them favourable ratings.
The purpose of the 360 will be influential. If there is any link to pay then the 'rating' on the 360 becomes something of value outside of the intrinsic development process. The recipient has an interest in getting high 'scores'. We would recommend avoiding such a link but if it does exist then some form of managerial review of the selected respondents is inevitable.
But, all of our experience is that people approach this from a development perspective - and actively seek balanced feedback - as long as the systems / processes surrounding the 360 are supportive and used for development rather than evaluation. If you see 360 as a long-term process then even those people that in the first year are suspicious and load their selections with favourable colleagues, over time they will move to selecting an appropriate mix of colleagues and direct reports.
Brendan
Find out more about 360 degree appraisal solutions with Bowland Solutions
Friday 13 April 2007
Editing responses in 360 degree feedback
Dubious meddling or good management?
We were discussing our 360 system and annual appraisal system with a prospective client yesterday. During the discussion we advised the prospective client that it was possible within our system to 'exclude' a respondent from the feedback report. This sparked a lively debate.
We didn't touch on it in our conversation but as well as excluding one person's responses from a report we also get asked to allow an administrator to have the option of editing a particular response.
Should it be allowed?
I see the real issue here as what is driving the request. If the request is driven from an interest in ensuring that the feedback someone receives is balanced, supportive, and constructive then being able to exclude a respondent or edit feedback can be appropriate. It is not that you wish to ignore the respondent just that their feedback may be distorting the whole report and it is better handled separately. Editing a response can be a judicial solution to an ill-judged narrative that is likely to derail the feedback session.
If, however, the drive to edit or exclude comes from a desire to massage the results of feedback, ignore controversial comments, or simply reflects a culture of interfering then that is not appropriate.
Organisational culture plays a big part on decisions you have to make when implementing 360 feedback and I see this as another example of cultural influences.
Our solution for the prospective client? Well, our online 360 feedback solution allows us to switch features on or off for each client. For this client, we would be switching it off.
Brendan
Find out more about 360 degree appraisal solutions with Bowland Solutions
We were discussing our 360 system and annual appraisal system with a prospective client yesterday. During the discussion we advised the prospective client that it was possible within our system to 'exclude' a respondent from the feedback report. This sparked a lively debate.
We didn't touch on it in our conversation but as well as excluding one person's responses from a report we also get asked to allow an administrator to have the option of editing a particular response.
Should it be allowed?
I see the real issue here as what is driving the request. If the request is driven from an interest in ensuring that the feedback someone receives is balanced, supportive, and constructive then being able to exclude a respondent or edit feedback can be appropriate. It is not that you wish to ignore the respondent just that their feedback may be distorting the whole report and it is better handled separately. Editing a response can be a judicial solution to an ill-judged narrative that is likely to derail the feedback session.
If, however, the drive to edit or exclude comes from a desire to massage the results of feedback, ignore controversial comments, or simply reflects a culture of interfering then that is not appropriate.
Organisational culture plays a big part on decisions you have to make when implementing 360 feedback and I see this as another example of cultural influences.
Our solution for the prospective client? Well, our online 360 feedback solution allows us to switch features on or off for each client. For this client, we would be switching it off.
Brendan
Find out more about 360 degree appraisal solutions with Bowland Solutions
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
