Although implemented and praised more and more, the 360 degrees feedback has, as it should be, its critics. The majority seems to be convinced that instead of encouraging performance, the instrument only discourages it; by the same token it destroys it.
Even though this scenario is truly apocalyptic, the main criticisms to this evaluation system should be analyzed:
The first criticism: it is not useful and more than that it is not indicated in the companies where employees are not previously informed over the procedure of offering feedback. I hope everyone agrees that instructing an employee over this matter is not a punctual activity solvable in two days of courses. And even if it would be, the implementation costs would grow in major companies more than necessary.
Whatever the situation, the solution is a simple one: the evaluation should be made with short, explicit and well addressed questions. The evaluation questions or affirmations shouldn’t contain words with double meaning, statements and negations in the same time, neologisms, over specialized words. If you ask your employees to offer opinions over the “meta-cognitive” abilities that their colleagues have, they might be put in an impossible situation. If, however, they are directly asked if they have the ability to learn, it is possible they know how to answer.
Moreover, as the time passes, offering feedback whenever it’s asked for, employees learn to control these abilities. It is true that the first evaluation session is not always the most successful one, but the quality of this process improves with time.
The second criticism: most of the times these assessments are not motivated, meaning there is no need felt to start such a process. Setting an optimal level of performance for the employees is a goal itself, a major motive, it has no need for other purposes to precede it. As long as the employees don’t know the reason, the quantity, and the means to do their job the chances of high performance are extremely low.
The third criticism: it is not a unique instrument to rely on, the information must always be correlated with others to become relevant. It is correct: the performance of employees will always stand at the intersection of their capacities and the manner their company encourages/motivates their manifestation. You can set the lath, but if you don’t provide a favorable environment for performance and the necessary instruments, it’s in vain! Even so, a survey elaborated correctly can also identify problems such as: precarious organizational environment, the lack of leadership, managerial problems. If the majority of employees has problems, for example, with the adhesion towards the company, it is clear that the problem isn’t theirs. Hence, most certainly the 360 degrees evaluation is not a universal remedy, but it is a valid and useful instrument.
All in all, an old saying states that: “The hand that doesn’t know how to write, blames the pen.”
The 360 degrees feedback is a useful instrument which can induce value, only if it is professionally implemented, in stable organizations, with clear structures and objectives. If the organization has problems, if the management is scarce, than the 360 feedback may face problems. But it may be possible that the feedback itself can be the exit from the negative labyrinth.