EXPLORING THE DIMENSIONS OF 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK IN ACADEMICS

EXPLORING THE DIMENSIONS OF 360 DEGREE FEEDBACK IN ACADEMICS Ms. Shitika 1, Mr. Barun Kumar Jha 2, Ms. Bhoomika 3 1 Assistant Professor, LLDIMS, GGSIPU 2 Research Scholar, Dept. of Applied Economics & Commerce, Patna University 3 Student, BPIBS, GGSIPU ABSTRACT Performance appraisal has come to occupy a pivotal place in human resource functions. The traditional tops down supervisor-only evaluation systems are no longer practical. This has been replaced by performance appraisal which has a wider perspective. 360-degree feedback system is a new concept in this regard which was first introduced in USA. The purpose of this research study was to gather information that would assist in analysing that how far 360 degree feedback system has been implemented in our educational institutes. It further tries to explore the implementability of the system and the repercussions thereof. Structured questionnaire is used to collect responses from various educational institutes in East Delhi. The methodology of the chi-square test of independence between two qualitative statistic figure values is also detailed in the paper. It has been concluded that 360-degree feedback is powerful and has been implemented to a great extent because it makes it easy to gather and report credible feedback about important issues that are otherwise hard to quantify specially in terms of academics.it also highlights the relationship between workexperience of employees and their willingness to undergo training. This develops a scope for future research investigating into the metanalysis of the components of feedback system. Keywords- Performance Appraisal, 360 degree system, Implementation 247

1.1 Introduction of 360-Degree Appraisal In today s complex world organizations are continually leading towards the ways to improve performance and satisfy the demands of all stakeholders. Achieving this inevitably involves change, which then becomes the pivotal dynamics for success. For an organization to evolve the people working with in it will have to adapt and for this to be successful, they need to know what it is all about. The way they are currently performing that needs to be changed, also the assessment techniques of performance need to be transformed. Performance appraisal has come to occupy a pivotal place in human resource functions. The traditional merit rating which focused on personality traits is being replaced by performance appraisal with focus on work results. Performance feedback is one of the important element of organizational interventions. Every Organisation uses one of the techniques of performance evaluation system. The traditional Supervisor only evaluation system are no more operational. As the size of organizations have grown up, the complexities begun to arise in measuring the performance of employees. It led to the need of a fairer, transparent and effective system to measure the performance of employees. Many techniques evolved under the modern methods of performance evaluation such as MBO, Critical Incident methods, BARS etc. 360 degree Feedback is one among the modern methods of performance appraisals. The study focuses on the implementation of 360-degree feedback particularly in educational institutions. It further tries to explore 360-degree feedback process and critical analysis of the pros and cones of the method when it comes to the implementation of this method in organizations. 1.2 Objectives of the study The objectives of the study on 360-degree feedback are multi-pronged. The study tries to unveil the fundamental dimensions of 360 degree feedback system. It further explores its implementation process in educational institutes and how the process is to be conducted. The study also tries to find the underlying factors which make the implementation of the system a success. It 248

also studies the impact of 360 degree system on the performance of employees as well as the organization. This can further help in identifying the repercussions of the system if implemented in academics. 1.3 Literature Review 360-degree feedback system is an emerging concept and it was first introduced in USA. 360-degree feedback involves evaluation of a manager by everyone above, alongside and below him. Several corporations like General Electric, Reliance Industries, Crompton Greaves, Wipro, Infosys, and Godrej Soaps are using this technique. But as far as academic institutions are concerned, a little literature is available on it. Therefore, it put forward the need to identify 360 degree framework in academics. In human resources, 360-degree feedback, also known as 'multi-rater feedback', 'multisource feedback', or 'multisource assessment', is employee development feedback that comes from all around the employee. "360" refers to the 360 degrees in a circle. The feedback would come from subordinates, peers, and managers in the organizational hierarchy, as well as selfassessment, and in some cases external sources such as customers and suppliers or other interested stakeholders. It may be contrasted with upward feedback, where managers are given feedback by their direct reports, or a traditional performance appraisal, where the employees are most often reviewed only by their manager. A large study on 360 degree feedback has been conducted yet and increasingly, organizations are implementing 360-degree feedback systems as part of their managerial development programs. Although many organizations have implemented such systems, research has lagged behind; forcing practitioners to rely on "personal experience and/or trial and - error approaches" (Church & Bracken, 1997, p.151). Most 360-degree feedback programs are designed for enhancing leadership and management capabilities (London & Beatty, 1993; Van Velsor & Leslie, 1991). Educational Institutions are yet to experiment this technique. Walter W. Tomow et. Al., Jossey Bass, London has given the different dimensions of judging the performance of an individual on the basis of 360 degree feedback: Administrative Leadership Communication 250

Carey presents various approaches to use 360 degree feedback as well as generalizations regarding the successful implementation of 360 degree feedback. He asserts that360 degree feedback can create productive relationships between managers and employees. The following quote by John F. Welch, Jr., CEO, GE was taken from the book 360 degree feedback (Edwards & Ewen, 1996, pg. 3). Any company that s going to make it in the 1990 s and beyond has got to find a way to engage the mind of every single employee. If you re not thinking all the time about making every person more valuable, you don t have a chance. What s the alternative? Wasted minds? Uninvolved people? A labor force that s angry or bored? That doesn t make sense. 360-Degree feedback is aimed at improving performance by providing a better awareness of strengths and weaknesses. The employee receives feedback, in anonymous form, on performance ratings from peers, superiors and subordinates (Kaplan & Palus, 1994). Employees view performance information from multiple sources as fair, accurate, credible and motivating. They are more likely to be motivated to change their work habits to obtain the esteem of their co-workers than the respect of their supervisors (Edwards & Ewin, 1996). 360 Degree Feedback improves the quality of performance measures by using multiraters providing a more balanced and comprehensive view. The information is more reliable, valid and credible because the providers interact regularly with the employee at work (Edwards & Ewen, 1996). Susan Hathfield(2000), a well known Management Consultant and a Post Graduate in the subject from the University of Michigan, USA, has specialized in HR Systems and Industrial Relations, and she defines 360 degrees feedback as: 360 degree feedback is a method and a tool that provides each employee the opportunity to receive performance feedback from his or her supervisor and four to eight peers, reporting staff members, co-workers and customers. Each individual in selfassessment also responds to most 360 degrees feedback tools. 360-degree feedback allows each individual to understand how his effectiveness as an employee, Co-worker or staff member is viewed by others. In the research paper Subordinate Appraisal of Supervisors- An Improvement 251

in Appraisal Technique (Simms, 1996) recommended an action plan be developed to implement a subordinate appraisal system in the Texarkana, Texas Fire Department. The results of his study indicated that subordinate appraisal of supervisors could be a viable accepted system that could improve the overall performance appraisal process. David Lobdell in his research project Selecting An Appropriate Performance Appraisal Program For Spokane Valley Fire Department, (1997) recommended that 360 degree appraisal was the most beneficial for a fire department in today s work environment. Lobdell recommended that the evaluation be implemented carefully and that they should be used only for employee self evaluation and development. The individual ratings should be kept confidential and should be fairly short. He recommended that training must be conducted for both giving and receiving feedback before the program is implemented, and the program should be evaluated periodically. Implemented with care and training to enable people to better serve customers and develop their own careers, 360 degree feedback is a positive addition to your performance management system. Started haphazardly, because it s the current flavor in organizations, or because "everyone" else is doing it, 360 feedbacks will create a disaster from which you will require months and possibly years, to recover. 1.4 The Good About 360 Degree Feedback 360 degree feedback has many many proponents. The 1999 State of the Industry Report, from the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD), reviewed the training practices of more than 750 firms. Fifty-five firms, described by ASTD as leading edge in their training approaches, rely heavily on employee feedback, including 360 degree feedback and peer review, for individual development plans and annual performance reviews. Seventy-five percent of companies provided individual development plans, and 33 percent provided 360-degree feedback for most of their employees in 1998, compared to 50 percent and 10 percent in 1997, according to ASTD. Organizations that are happy with the 360- degree component of their performance management systems identify these positive features of the process. 252

Dr. John Sullivan, of San Francisco State University, states his concerns about 360- degree feedback: "There is no data it actually improves productivity, increases retention, decreases grievances or that it is superior to forced ranking and standard Performance Appraisal systems. It sounds good but there is no proof it works other than a lot of companies have tried it." 1.5 Is 360-degree feedback data legally defensible if linked to performance appraisal? As William Swan & Philip Margulies summarize in their book How to Do A Superior Performance Appraisal, EEOC guidelines state that an organisation must demonstrate that its appraisal process is valid, that it is job related, and that it accurately measures significant aspects of job performance. The organization must demonstrate that the appraisal system is the best available method, that no other system is less discriminatory. This in turn requires that the raters can be identified with the ratings they provide. Given that raters are anonymous in the 360-degree feedback process, revealing raters would violate confidentiality. Ultimately, organizations could be at risk if 360-degree feedback scores are utilized for decisions arising from an appraisal process. 2.1 Data Collection and Analysis Data has been collected from both primary as well as secondary sources. Primary data is collected through structured questionnaire. The secondary data include information regarding 360-degree feedback and its implementation on the educational institutions. An extensive literature review was conducyed in order to gather relevant information on performance measurement system. Around 15 educational institutions were visited and around 100 questionnaire were filled to conduct research. 2.2 Analysis and Interpretation This research has more qualitative content rather than quantitative. So the techniques involved in analyses did not require much statistical analysis. Analysis and interpretation has been kept very simple in this research study. The study examined the various practices/ technique adopted by various educational institutes in East Delhi. The implementation of 360 degree feedback in academics involved the analysis of following concepts: 1. Size of the institutes The implementation of any system is only possible when the institute has enormous capacity to absorb the system successfully. The implementation of 253

360 degree system considers the size of the organization so that appraisal feedback can be taken from all the stakeholders. 2. Factors affecting Recruitment of Employees There are certain factors like knowledge, skills and attitudes, experience of employees which pertain to a particular job specification. All these factors needs consideration while implementing the performance appraisal system particularly 360 degree system. The factors taken for the study are: Knowledge Experience Skill Attitude Personality Qualification 3. Employees perception about Organization Each employee perceived its organization in some way. Change is dynamic in organizations. Every employees resist change. But it depends how effectively individuals are able to cope up with those organizational change as employees. There are certain consideration to be kept in mind in order to create a strong employer branding. Organisations give very negligible job rotation exposurebut enriches jobs to greater extent. Publicizing available career opportunities is very good along with career assistance and career counseling. Following parameters are considered to ascertain employees perception towards organization: Organisation has clearly defined roles and responsibilities Organisation gives scope for job rotations It enriches jobs by offering more variety, challenge and autonomy It develops and publishes available career opportunities It helps employees in assessing their career needs by providing assistance and counseling It devises adequate training and development programs to enable the employees to fit into higher positions 4. Objective of System Implementation Every firm has own objectives of implementing a system. No single system can be developed which can be implememented in every organization. 254

Each organization has its on own objectives of using a particular system for performance evaluation. 360 degree feedback comes with its delimiting factors which are pertinent to specific organization. Therefore, it becomes important to identify the objective with which system has been incorporated into the organization. The objectives of appraisal system includes: Identify training/fdp needs Give promotions Give increments Give transfers 5. Organisational considerations Performance appraisal is one of the most powerful weapon to evaluate organizational effectiveness. Th implementation of performance appraisal system helps in identifying the key consideration which can affect the organization as a whole. Every organization has well defined structures and policies. Selection of an appraisal system depends on all these key considerations. 80% of the respondents have agreed that it helps employees to make up gaps in knowledge, skill, attitude and perform better, 85% have assented that it is helpful in Identifying the strengths and weaknesses of employees, 90%say that it always gives opportunity for self-appraisal, 70% say that organisations encourage employees to accept more responsibilities and challenges and about 65% agree that these helps employees to acquire new capabilities. The level of significance of appraisal system in the organization depends on the following considerations: Helps employees to make up gaps in knowledge, skill, attitude and perform better Identify strengths and weaknesses of employees Give opportunity for self-appraisal Encourage employees to accept more responsibilities and challenges Helps employees to acquire new capabilities 6. Objectivity of Performance appraisal reports Another consideration for performance appraisal system is that of its genuinity. Organizations prefer those evaluation techniques which are transparent and objective in its approach. This will lead to greater employee satisfaction and will help to inculcate a healthy culture in the organization thereby increasing the productivity of the organization. 90% of the respondents believe that performance appraisal is always based on objective assessment and adequate information and not on favouritism. 255

7. Effectiveness of System This factor tries to identify the applicability of 360 degree system in the type of the environment in which it is being implemented. The effectiveness is determined by the coordination between the organizational goals and its environment. There may be closed system and open system. But the effectiveness of appraisal system will vary with the change in the environment in which the firm operates. 8. Developing employee calibre The objective of performance appraisal system is not only to rate the performance of employee but also to further inculcate the caliber of th employees. This can help them in sharpening their skills so that they can contribute to organizational goals. 360 degree appraisal system was valued on following parameters: The performance appraisal system(360- degree feedback) in an organization helps in identifying and developing potentials of employees Performance appraisal system is not effective and need to Modify the existing performance appraisal system Introduce a separate potential appraisal system 9. Identification of training needs The training need depends on how effective are the performance appraisal systems of the oreganisations. It has been found that if performance appraisal system is transparent, then most of the times employees are willing to sponsot to and contribute to the training programs for their self development and for the development of the organization as a whole. 10. Intergrating training programs with task accomplishment The aim to conduct training programs is to help the employees to fulfill their job responsibilities effectively and efficiently. A post training survey can be conducted for the purpose. The responses reveals that training sessions after the appraisal proves to be effective and helpful in task accomplishment by employees. 11. Improvement in key skills In this era of competition, organizations can achieve an edge over its competitors by developing skills such as quick decision making, employee competencies etc. Training sessions in academic institutes shows that it works more on improving the performance of employees at work. 12. Employees perception of 360 degree system Implementation of performance appraisal system depends on the employees view 256

about the system. It has been studies that employees rate the system as effective on the basis of their individual perception rather than by being more objective. 13. Senior subordinate communication 360 degree system itself implies open communication. It tries to take into consideration all the problems relating to communication between employer and employee. Survey shows that still there lies the proper of communication between senior and subordinate. Most employees do not participate in the appraisal performance. There are chances of bias present in the implementation of the system. This problem needs to be encountered. only 25% employees communicate their feelings about their jobs to their seniors freely and 75% are reluctant to express these. 14. Communicating appraisal feedback It is an important for any appraisal system to generate feedback to the employees so that they can work on their areas of improvement. Most of the employees agreed that 360 degree feedback system conveyed appropriate feedback to the appraise from time to time. This can help the employees to identify the critical areas of self improvement. 68% respondents feel that the appraisal feedback is not conveyed to the appraisees from time to time. Therefore, 360 degree system can help in overcoming this limitation. 15. Frequency of Performance appraisal Efficiency of performance appraisal system depends on the time intervals at which appraisal is done. Length of period is a key factor for successful implementation of performance appraisal system. Most employees believe that appraisal process should be conducted on yearly basis in order to generate effective results. 16. Purpose of 360 degree appraisal system Besides organizational objectives, every techniques is developed with some major focus areas. 360 degree system is developed with the objective of reducing the biases of individual differences when appraising is being performed. Research shows that the major focus of 360 degree feedback in academic institutions is towards job rotation and identification of training needs. The various purposes to implement 360 degree system in consideration are: Performance improvement Promotion Training & Development 257

Transfer Job Rotation Punishment Counselling 2.3 Chi-Square Test of Independence The chi-square test of independence is a nonparametric statistical test to determine if two or more classifications of the samples are independent or not. By independence, we mean that the row and column variables are unassociated (i.e. knowing the value of a row variable will not help us predict the value of a column variable, and likewise, knowing the value of a column variable will not help us predict the value of a row variable). The methodology of the chisquare test of independence between three qualitative statistic figure values is conducted taken from the structured questionnaire itself. The first step to conduct the study is the expression of the null and alternative hypothesis. The second step is to determine the significance level which is taken to be 5% for the present study. The third step is to calculate the chisquare test statistic (χ2) using SPSS. 2.4 Expression of Hypotheses The null hypothesis H0 expresses the independence of variables. In contrast, the alternative hypothesis Ha, which we want to prove to be true in the majority of cases, mostly expresses a statistical association of the variables. The truth of the alternative hypothesis is always shown only indirectly, in a way that will show that the null hypothesis is unlikely, and that the alternative hypothesis (the only remaining hypothesis) is therefore likely. In this study of chi-square test of independence the null and alternative hypothesis are expressed as- H0: The two qualitative statistic figure values A and B are independent Ha: The two qualitative statistic figure values A and B are related 2.5 Calculation of the Chi-Square Test Statistic using SPSS The chi-square test statistic that asymptotically approaches a chi-square distribution was first introduced by the British statistician Karl Pearson in 1900. A chi-square distribution is mostly used in the testing of a compliance table with some theoretical model. This involves comparing observed and expected frequencies. The chi-square test of independence was applied to these pairs of factors: Work experience of Employeeswillingness to undertake training 258

Willingness to undertake induction training after appraisal-willingness to sponsor for the induction training after 360 degree appraisal Therefore the following set of hypothesis are formulated for two sets of study 1. Work experience and willingness for training Ho- Willingness for training is independent of work experience of employees H1- Willingness for training is related to work experience of employees 2. Willingness for training and willingness to sponsor for training Ho- Willingness for training is independent of willingness to sponsor for training H1- Willingness for training is related to willingness to sponsor for training Chi- Square test was conducted on data collected from the questionnaire and the following results are derived therefore: Pearson 6.000 4.199 Chi-Square Likelihood 6.592 4.159 Ratio Linear-by- 1.963 1.161 Linear Association N of Valid 3 Cases Table-1 Willingness of employees for training*willingness of employees to sponsor for training Asymp. Sig. (2- Value df sided) Pearson 6.000 4.199 Chi-Square Likelihood 6.592 4.159 Ratio Linear-by- 1.393 1.238 Linear Association N of Valid 3 Cases Table-2 Work Experience of employees * Willingness for undertaking training 2.6 Interpretation Value df Asymp. Sig. (2- sided) The assumption of a statistically significant association was not confirmed. Lower the significance value, less likely it is that the 259

two variables are independent (unrelated). In the present case the significance value for both the cases is 0.19 which shows a high degree of independence when the significance level is set at 0.05. therefore, it can be observed that as work experience increases the willingness to induce in training decreases. Also there is some association between the willingness of employees to sponsor for training and to undertake training. Though, the direction of association is not known. This can serve as an important dimension for 360 degree appraisal system. 3.1 Discussion In this atmosphere, the 360-degree feedback concept has much to offer. Unlike the traditional performance appraisal model, in which superiors evaluate subordinates, the 360-degree approach does not rely solely on the superior to provide feedback to the employee. Instead, it enlists multiple constituencies to provide feedback to selected organizational members. These constituencies include superiors, peers, and coworkers in support areas, subordinates, internal customers of the unit's work, and external customers of the organization's products. In this process the feedback recipient is expected to evaluate his or her own performance on the selected behavioral dimensions. This self-evaluation is then compared with that provided by the other feedback providers. The recipient is encouraged to use the feedback to improve performance and to make a greater effort to blend his or her contributions with the needs of the group. This linking of individual performance with feedback from all relevant constituencies fits well into the emerging team-based workplace. Another difference from traditional performance appraisal is that 360-degree feedback is supposed to be given anonymously. Study has demonstrated that anonymous feedback is more honest and closer to what raters actually feel about the feedback recipients. Appraisers whose identity is known to the feedback recipients give higher ratings than those who are anonymous. Moreover, a step further to organize induction training can be particularly helpful in upgrading the appraisal system next time. 3.2 Conclusion While the 360-degree concept has much to offer and many successes have been documented there are also stories of confusion and disappointment. Many of the 360-degree programs are carried out in the absence of a strategic context, and fail to focus on contributions that they can make to a firm's competitive advantage. There is 260

little consistency to what is being done, and 360-degree feedback programs can range from any deviations from the traditional vertical form of performance appraisal to highly sophisticated feedback systems that systematically gather, analyze, and disseminate behavior data to managers, professionals, and even rank-and-file workers functioning in teams. Many organizations adopt 360-degree feedback without clearly defining the mission and the scope of the program. Consequently, employees who receive the feedback are left to figure out for themselves how to cope with the results and tend not to develop goals and action plans following 360-degree applications. One study concluded that while such programs are popular, in many cases little more than lip service is paid to them. Furthermore, there is discouraging evidence regarding the effectiveness of feedback-intervention programs as tools in bringing about improvements in performance. A review of over 600 feedback studies found that only one-third reported improvements in performance. Another third reported negative changes in performance, while the final third reported no impact. In their haste to gain the advertised benefits of 360-degree feedback, organizations may not be sufficiently aware of the problems that often accompany its adoption. Failure to recognize the problems that often occur can lead to disillusionment, reduce the value of the exercise, and confirm the lip service that tends to be paid to 360-degree results. Interpersonal behaviors (e.g., leadership, team interaction, communication, sales, service, negotiation and instruction) aren t easily quantified or measured. The best way to get objective data about this aspect of performance is 360-degree feedback. 261

References 1. Atwater, L. and Roush, P. and Fischthal A. "The Influence of Upward Feedback on Self and Follower Ratings of Leadership." Personnel Psychology, (vol. 48), 1995, pp.34-59. 2. Atwater, L. and Waldman, D. and Atwater, D. and Cartier, P. "The Effects of Follow-up and Cynicism: An Upward Feedback Experiment." Arizona State University West Working Paper, 1998. 3. Dallessio, A.T. "Using Multi-source Feedback for Employee Development and Personnel Decisions." In Smither J.W., Performance Appraisal: State ofthe Art of the Practice. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, 1998, pp. 278-230. 4. Dalton, Maxine. "Multi-rater Feedback and Conditions for Change." In Felnor, John W. and Prince, Jeffery M. Using 360-degree Feedback in Organizations. Center for Creative Leadership: Greensboro, NC, 1997. 5. Cochran, W. G. Some methods for strengthening the common χ2 tests, Biometrics, 1954. 10: pp. 417 451. 6. Yates, D., Moore, D., McCabe, G. The Practice of Statistics. 1st Ed. New York: W.H. Freeman, 1999. 7. Yates, F. Contingency table involving small numbers and the χ2 test, Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 1934, 1(2): 217-235. JSTOR Archive for the journal 8. Nominal Association: Phi, Contingency Coefficient, Tschuprow s T, Cramer s V, Lambda, Uncertainty Coefficient. 9. Cohen s scale for correlation coefficient. [online]. [s.a.]. [Cited 2010-08-16]. 10. Zibran, M. F. CHI-Squared Test of Independence. Department of Computer Science, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. [online]. [Cited 2010-08-12]. 262