360-degree feedback score

A 360-degree feedback score summarizes how an individual's performance is perceived by people with a legitimate stake in it. Raters can include the supervisor, direct reports, colleagues, customers and suppliers. The recipient normally completes the same questionnaire, allowing self-ratings to be compared with the views of others on a defined scale such as 1–10. The resulting gaps and patterns can guide training and development.

When to use it

• Answer the key performance question: “How well are our people performing in the eyes of those who have a stake in their performance?”
• Assess this KPI within the Employee perspective.
• Plan data collection, formula use, reporting frequency, and data-source requirements for this KPI.
• Compare results against the targets, benchmarks, examples, or trend guidance available for this KPI.

Origins

Multi-source assessment has precedents in military evaluation. In business, Esso Research and Engineering made an early documented use during the 1950s by asking employees to rate their supervisors. The method expanded through leadership development in the 1980s and 1990s. Mark Edwards and Ann Ewen reported that they introduced the term “360° Feedback” in the mid-1980s as an alternative to “multirater.”

A consolidated score should prompt reflection, not conceal disagreement. A manager, peer and direct report can each observe different behaviour, so differences among rater groups may be more useful than one overall average.

What it is

Perspective: Employee perspective.

Key performance question: How well are our people performing in the eyes of those who have a stake in their performance?

Some organizations also use the results when considering pay or promotion. This can provide a broader basis than a purely top-down appraisal, which may depend excessively on one supervisor's personal judgement. However, using anonymous developmental feedback for administrative decisions is controversial because high stakes can distort ratings, participation and trust.

How to use it

Measurement

Select role-relevant, observable behaviours and obtain ratings from a balanced set of people who have enough direct experience to judge them. Report group averages, score distributions and differences between self and other groups rather than relying only on a single composite number.

Data collection method