An All-Around Good Idea
In efforts to ensure that leaders at all levels receive helpful feedback, supervisors and trustees frequently look to the power of the 360 review. This is a process designed to elicit developmental feedback from a range of sources, 360 degrees around the participant, with the goal of delivering honest and authentic data about a leader’s work from multiple perspectives; this approach closely reflects the actual up, down and sideways working relationships that characterize how most employees actually work today.
The rise in popularity of 360s has inspired the creation of many instruments to deliver the information sought. But are they all equally effective? And what really matters in generating high quality results in a 360 initiative? In our work at a range of organizations, SmarterWisdom has helped partner with leaders to conduct a range of 360s, using different approaches and instruments. In each case, and always, a significant amount of time and effort planning and pre-thinking has ensured worthwhile results.
In the course of our work on 360 initiatives, we have developed a set of best practices for these efforts. While every organization is different, and that should absolutely be reflected in the program a client undertakes, there are some fundamentals that are worth thinking through before the surveys start flying through the ether. The choices made prior to commencing the actual process will make all the difference.
Here’s our pre-takeoff checklist before launching the 360 process:
Definition: It is crucial that everyone involved commits to a 360-assessment process as a means for securing high quality development-focused feedback for individuals. This feedback is not typically collected for performance review or salary consideration. Data is solicited that “belongs” to the Participant, and that that person will share it under terms and conditions agreed upon when the process is initiated. In most situations, this means that the Participant will have significant control over elements of the process; elements of control that are specified in advance. This oversight and control relates directly to our belief that 360 reviews are for professional development and growth only.
Readiness: In S//W’s experience, it can be premature for some organizations to leap into the world of truth telling, where employees have permission to “tell it like it is.”. For many enterprises, there needs to be considerable pre-administration communication or other groundwork to set the stage, diminish anxiety and prepare participants and respondents to engage well in the experience.
Culture: To explore an organization’s readiness, take a good look at the specifics of its culture and workforce. For example, have most employees had prior experience with 360s, either in your enterprise or somewhere they worked earlier? What baggage might they be carrying that might affect their 360 experience? How would you characterize your organization’s cultural norms and style? Is it a place where informality reigns, or do employees operate in a more structured way? Is it fairly flat or largely hierarchical? How direct is typical communication with and between employees?
Significance: In other words, how big of a leap is the 360 experience you are proposing from what your employees understand to be your way of doing business? If it is significant, it is worth addressing that gap before you push the start button. We have designed an array of pre-launch interventions---from employee working groups to discuss and plan for employee concerns, to communications plans that carefully embed the 360 rollout in clear, relevant guidelines and explanations of the process---that can diminish anxiety and resistance to introducing a 360 project that was being viewed as threatening or disrespectful.
Once you have a sense of how easily your organization will adapt to the introduction of a 360 effort and have a plan for setting the stage to encourage a smooth take-off, there are best practices for choosing and administering the process and optimizing results:.
1. Seek out (or design) a sound instrument. For pre-designed instruments which imply that their assessment is valid, dig a bit more deeply with the designer to confirm what this means. For example, the assessment should probe for leadership-related behaviors which have been confirmed by solid, high-quality research. Don’t be misled by questions about qualities that sound like “common wisdom;” a lot of “wisdom” about leadership is based solely on casual observation not methodologically sound research. Excellence in methodology should underpin the statistical elements of the instrument, as well: if people are going to make challenging behavioral changes based on the information they get from the analysis of the instrument, those changes ought to be accurate. There are protocols for research methods that ensure things like statistical validity, for instance; the last thing you want is for someone to be misled by a score resulting from a defect in the research design or statistical analysis. You, and your employees, deserve to put resources into pursuing an analysis which is valid and meaningful. If you are using a consultant to assist you (see #3), request their criteria for selecting the instrument they are recommending. For organizations designing their own instruments, consult with internal resources in learning and development to ensure that the instrument being created passes the sound test for research and methodological standards or get outside assistance.
2. A point person must be identified to conduct the 360. This is someone with an independent perspective. If using internal resources, it should be someone from outside the department/division in which the Participant works, such as HR. Optimally, an individual from outside the organization will be engaged for this role: many of the best assessments require that their instruments be administered only by certified consultants.
3. Critical Process Components: The scope of the process—who does what-- must be laid out at the start. SmarterWisdom believes that the full learning loop for the 360 is accomplished when the Participant goes through the entire process, including participating in identifying target respondents, using best practices (as noted earlier) to encourage submissions, getting the assessment results, developing a full and clear understanding of the feedback through a debriefing, selecting areas for development activity and discussing that information with the supervisor. We recommend that this journey and its key touch points be set out for all participants at the offset as the minimal fundamental requirement for participation in the 360 process.
4. Participants choose their Respondents (those who complete the survey.) S//W is committed to a process design consistent with the basic premise that a 360 is first and foremost an opportunity for professional self-growth, therefore the Participant must experience trust in the process. Trust is important to respondents, as well, so they must be assured that feedback (outside of that from a supervisor) will only be delivered when it is obtained from multiple respondents and delivered in aggregate to avoid identification of individual sources. Transparency and clarity in the approach to the assessment process as well as the Participant’s ownership of the data resulting from their assessment, supports this trust. Without it, distrust encourages collusion and manipulation of data and process, potentially negating a 360s purpose and benefits.
5. To ensure strong participation, it is key for the Participant to communicate directly with their potential respondents, asking them to be part of their 360. This signals that the Participant is on board with this effort and truly wants and values the respondents’ input. Participants are also in charge of follow up (to encourage submissions) and messages of appreciation and thanks at the end of the process.
6. The assessment results should include both a narrative component and a dashboard.
7. The 360-point person must debrief assessment results one-on-one with the Participant after the data is gathered and compiled. This process should conclude with working with that individual to ensure that the Participant fully understands the results and that they are translated into a personalized development plan.
8. The process will conclude with any follow up agreed upon at the start of the process, including sharing of information with the Participant’s supervisor. The Participant will determine any follow up beyond that, such as sharing a summary of findings with members of their team/ community.
For those seeking a simple, easy-to-do-quick-fix, a 360 won’t work for you. The feedback from these initiatives is like gold: in addition to the objectives outlined above, 360 feedback is also a foundation for helping employees expand their self-awareness of who they are as a member of the culture of their workplace and their organizational team as viewed through the lens held by others with whom they work. Successful implementation will require attention to feelings, fairness and future actions.
SmarterWisdom believes that if 360s are done well, they can be an integral part of both individual and organizational development. They can be leveraged for an array of purposes, from providing a line of sight into organizational culture to increasing employee engagement and retention. People tell us that fearless and truthful feedback is what they crave, and we believe that a 360 is a wise investment for most organizations. Ensuring that clearly defined feedback systems and structures form the architecture of your place of work will create predictability, sustainability and cultural growth. Empowering everyone to participate regularly in this work can transform your organization.