360-degree feedback

About: 360-degree feedback is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 331 publications have been published within this topic receiving 13851 citations.

The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory.

Abstract: the total number of papers may exceed 10,000. Nevertheless, cost consideration forced us to consider mostly published papers and technical reports in English. 4 Formula 4 in Seifert (1991) is in error—a multiplier of n, of cell size, is missing in the numerator. 5 Unfortunately, the technique of meta-analysis cannot be applied, at present time, to such effects because the distribution of dis based on a sampling of people, whereas the statistics of techniques such as ARIMA are based on the distribution of a sampling of observations in the time domain regardless of the size of the people sample involved (i.e., there is no way to compare a sample of 100 points in time with a sample of 100 people). That is, a sample of 100 points in time has the same degrees of freedom if it were based on an observation of 1 person or of 1,000 people. 258 KLUGER AND DENISI From the papers we reviewed, only 131 (5%) met the criteria for inclusion. We were concerned that, given the small percentage of usable papers, our conclusions might not fairly represent the larger body of relevant literature. Therefore, we analyzed all the major reasons to reject a paper from the meta-analysis, even though the decision to exclude a paper came at the first identification of a missing inclusion criterion. This analysis showed the presence of review articles, interventions of natural feedback removal, and papers that merely discuss feedback, which in turn suggests that the included studies represent 1015% of the empirical FI literature. However, this analysis also showed that approximately 37% of the papers we considered manipulated feedback without a control group and that 16% reported confounded treatments, that is, roughly two thirds of the empirical FI literature cannot shed light on the question of FI effects on performance—a fact that requires attention from future FI researchers. Of the usable 131 papers (see references with asterisks), 607 effect sizes were extracted. These effects were based on 12,652 participants and 23,663 observations (reflecting multiple observations per participant). The average sample size per effect was 39 participants. The distribution of the effect sizes is presented in Figure 1. The weighted mean (weighted by sample size) of this distribution is 0.41, suggesting that, on average, FI has a moderate positive effect on performance. However, over 38% of the effects were negative (see Figure 1). The weighted variance of this distribution is 0.97, whereas the estimate of the sampling error variance is only 0.09. A potential problem in meta-analyses is a violation of the assumption of independence. Such a violation occurs either when multiple observations are taken from the same study (Rosenthal, 1984) or when several papers are authored by the same person (Wolf, 1986). In the present investigation, there were 91 effects derived from the laboratory experiments reported by Mikulincer (e.g., 1988a, 1988b). This raises the possibility that the average effect size is biased, because his studies manipulated extreme negative FIs and used similar tasks. In fact, the weighted average d in Mikulincer's studies was —0.39; whereas in the remainder of the

Does performance improve following multisource feedback? a theoretical model, meta-analysis, and review of empirical findings

Abstract: We review evidence showing that multisource feedback ratings are related to other measures of leadership effectiveness and that different rater sources conceptualize performance in a similar manner. We then describe a meta-analysis of 24 longitudinal studies showing that improvement in direct report, peer, and supervisor ratings over time is generally small. We present a theoretical framework and review empirical evidence suggesting performance improvement should be more likely for some feedback recipients than others. Specifically, improvement is most likely to occur when feedback indicates that change is necessary, recipients have a positive feedback orientation, perceive a need to change their behavior, react positively to the feedback, believe change is feasible, set appropriate goals to regulate their behavior, and take actions that lead to skill and performance improvement. It has been nearly 10 years since London and Smither (1995) evaluated the state of multisource feedback practice and offered theory-based propositions for understanding how people process and use the feedback. This article assesses progress in the field, especially focusing on the extent to which feedback recipients improve their performance after receiving multisource feedback. We argue that practitioners should not expect large, widespread performance improvement after employees receive multisource feedback. Instead, we present a theoretical model that suggests some feedback recipients should be more likely to improve than others. First, we review empirical evidence concerning the validity of multisource feedback. This is important because it would make little sense to focus

Can multi-source feedback change perceptions of goal accomplishment, self-evaluations, and performance-related outcomes? theory-based applications and directions for research

Abstract: Multi-source feedback extends traditional performance appraisal by collecting information from subordinates, peers, supervisors, and customers. Ratees often receive the results along with normative data and self-ratings. This paper explores how multi-source feedback goes beyond traditional performance appraisal by providing ratees with comparative information. Focusing on person perception and information processing dynamics, this paper develops a model and associated propositions to explain the effects of multi-source feedback on perceptions of goal accomplishment, re-evaluation of self-image, and changes in outcomes such as goals, development, behavior, and performance. Moderators of relationships between the major components in the model include individual difference variables (self-image, feedback seeking, self-monitoring, task-specific self-efficacy, and impression management) and situational conditions (the content and process of multi-source feedback and organizational performance standards). Issues of research and practice intended to improve understanding and effectiveness of multi-source feedback are discussed.

360° feedback: Accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness.

Abstract: This study examined how 360 degree feedback ratings and self-other rating discrepancies related to reactions to feedback, perceptions of feedback accuracy, perceived usefulness of the feedback, and recipients' receptivity to development. The results indicated that less favorable ratings were related to beliefs that feedback was less accurate and to negative reactions. Negative reactions and perceptions that feedback was less accurate were related to beliefs that the feedback was less useful. Those who found feedback less useful were perceived by a facilitator as less development-focused. Goal orientation did not moderate the relationship between ratings and perceptions of accuracy or reactions to feedback. Goal orientation was related to perceptions of usefulness of the process several weeks after receipt of feedback. The results question widely held assumptions about 360 degree feedback that negative and discrepant feedback motivates positive change.

The impact of 360-degree feedback on management skills development

Abstract: This study investigated changes in the skill levels of managers which occurred two years following the managers' participation in 360-degree feedback The major objective was to investigate how skill development, development efforts, and environmental support for development are related The Management Skills Profile (MSP) was used to measure skills and to give feedback Of the original 198 managers who received feedback, 48 accepted the opportunity to complete the instrument again two years later At that time, they also completed a questionnaire surveying what development activities they had completed and the extent to which they received support for development from their supervisor and the organization The first hypothesis was that, for the group, (a) participants' skills would increase following feedback, and (b) self–other agreement would be greater at Time 2 than at Time 1 This was supported The second hypothesis was that management skills would be related to later advancement This also was supported The third hypothesis was that skill development would be related to both development efforts and environmental support, and that some development activities would be more effective than others Hypothesis four was that those who put more effort into development (a) would have received at Time 1 ratings which were more favorable and more congruent with their self-ratings, and (b) would have received more environmental support Hypotheses three and four were only partially supported The results have implications for what managers can do to develop their skills and how others can support this development © 1993 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc