The Impact of 360 Degree Feedback on Employee Role in Leadership Development

 

Uttam Kumar Das, Jayakrushna Panda*

P.G. Department of Business Administration, Utkal University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India

 

ABSTRACT:

360 degree feedback has gained popularity as a performance management and career development tool in the organizations. It is a useful development tool for employees who are in a management role, and also useful to help people be more effective in their current roles, and also to help them understand what areas they should focus for development. The study is conducted about the employee’s role in leadership development through 360 degree feedback. The 360 degree feedback is not like a typical performance appraisal approach. It provides the feedback from all aspects from supervisors, seniors, peers, subordinates, suppliers, customers for an individual, the same individual will also rate himself and then match the performance from others rating. This study tests the compound correlation between employee leadership development and the application of 360-degree feedback in an organization. The contribution of this research is done through a sample of 40 employees chosen by different experienced group occupying various positions in IT organizations. The results shown that there were 20 common feedbacks in 360 degree feedback of organizations in Bhubaneswar. The data indicated that most of the feedbacks were very important. The study has been conducted on a group of employees to improve leadership development of 360 degree feedback. The results of the this analysis demonstrate that the implementation of 360-degree feedback in an organization not only gives rise to employee’s leadership development, but also helps in sustaining organizational development.

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

The primary study founded that every senior academicians are having full learning about the performance appraisal system. The traditional performance appraisal is not helpful to the employees in the educational institutions thus senior academicians are agreed to appraise Superiors, Peers, and Subordinates. They have agreed with 360-degree feedback is a good modern assessment system and it is an essential techniques for educational institutions.

 

The 360 degree feedback gives a clear picture of the employees and also helps to know strength and weakness, which is useful for people growth and development of employees (Das and Panda, 2015). This study came about because of a desire to find out more about the place of 360-degree feedback on leadership and management development. The work is set in the higher education leadership environment, and is timely in a period of faster developmental attrition in the global tertiary leadership sector currently, placing pressure on succession leadership planning and development. The study investigated that the 360 degree feedback appraisal system that measures an employee's performance through several sources such as peers, subordinates, and supervisors creates a wide and unbiased review of employee performance (Tyler, 1987). This longitudinal study investigates 360 degree feedback are projected by the favorability of ratings received, and moderated by important individuals' self-efficacy and perceived significance of feedback. Five developmental criteria are investigated longitudinally: (i) self-assessments, (ii) lines employees' ratings, (iii) amount of developmental activity, (iv) global self-efficacy and (v) elf-efficacy for development Caroline et al., (2006). (Lepsinger and Lucia, 1997) indicate that the 360 degree feedback process involves collecting views about a Person's behavior and the influence of that behavior from a number of rating sources. Thus, a 360 degree feedback program tries to transfer feedback to the receiver in regards to his/ her behavior in the workplace environment and how it influences other individuals that activity with that employee. (Bookman, 1999) which states that 360-degree feedback has been used in business and industry as a self-development tool. The term “360-degree feedback” refers to collecting and processing, multi-rater assessments of an individual and then feeding that person back the results.

 

The process includes tuning into the observations and perceptions of those around the individual who are in a position to observe behavior and skills. The critical aspect of 360-degree feedback is to identify gaps between perception and desired performance (Wilson, 1997). Good, reliable and well-expressed feedback is critical to self-improvement inside the workplace environment. To recognize how others perceive us and experience our behavior is a key to self-awareness and development. (Gallagher, 2008) submits that this multi-source feedback also allows people to see how others look at their effectiveness and become more conscious of how their effectiveness as an individual, co-worker, or employee is respected by others.

 

THE 360 DEGREE PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS:

Performance appraisal systems have several plans and aid organizations in setting performance goals, setting clear scenarios, and supporting employees' self esteem Palaiologos et al., (2011). Research often criticizes traditional appraisal systems for being ‘unfair’ and for creating tensions between employees and employers in the organization (Rowland and Hall, 2012). Modern appraisal systems comprise team assessment, upward feedback, peer assessment, self-review assessment, and direct supervisor feedback. 360-degree feedback is a process through which many sources- subordinates, peers, direct supervisors, customers, and even the individual under assessment provide their feedback on an individual's job performance in an attempt to obtain a balanced and rounded view of the performance (Mondy, 2010). 360-degree appraisal minimizes bias and represents an assessment technique that best conveys an employee's performance by allowing individuals nearby to the employee to represent an exact picture of his/ her efforts and job execution; in addition, 360-degree feedback generates positive outcomes in conditions of employee behavior Palaiologos et al., (2011).

 

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT:

The 360 feedback is a useful tool and help employees be more efficient in their current roles besides to help them know what areas they have to concentrate for improvement. The feedback from all sides from employees, seniors, peers, subordinates, providers, customers for an individual, that person will likewise rate himself and afterward coordinate the execution from others evaluations. The outcomes indicated that in that location has been an overall positive effect reported of 360 Degree feedback on management skills and leadership development (Das and Panda, December 2016). Applying a 360 degree feedback system has been just that a system. As such, it must function within the limits of the organization, and its design must include a systems-view methodology to take into account its impact and consequences on the rest of the organization (Jones and Bearly, 1996). Most successful 360 degrees feedback systems are performed on a regular basis, not as a one-time occurrence, and this must be taken into consideration in terms of its financial, cultural, and process effects on the organization (Yukl and Lepsinger, 1995).

 

The effects of the procedure must be measured on an organizational layer, and changes made when necessary. If used properly, the process should have lasting effects on the organization, including increased communication, encouragement of feedback-rich environment, increased employee creativity toward development, and increased employee participation Gebelein et al., (1998). 360-degree feedback has been used in business and industry as a self-development tool. The term “360-degree feedback” refers to gathering and processing multi-rater assessments of an individual and then feeding that person back the results (Bookman, 1999). The process includes a self-assessment and peer appraisals. The data are compiled and analyzed by a trained professional. The individual receives the feedback and then creates a plan for personal and professional development. 360-degree feedback is primarily used for developmental purposes, yet organizations do use it for evaluation and performance appraisals.

 

MATERIAL AND METHODS:

The research instrument to measure the constructs of interest was developed either by adapting existing measures in the research context or by converting the definitions of the construct into a questionnaire format. All variables were measured on a 5 - point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree; 5= strongly agree). The feedbacks that have been proposed from HR employees through the questionnaire basis: F1: Gives constructive feedback to others; F2: Generates new ideas to make things better; F3: Shares information and ideas with others; F4: Measurement of performance against objectives; F5: Helps others to develop and apply their skills and knowledge; F6: Involves others and encourages full participation; F7: Views one's own leadership development as significant; F8: Asks for feedback from others to improve his/her performance ; F9: Effectively communicates thoughts and ideas; F10: Supports needed changes; F11: Willingness to change behavior; F12: Gaps are understood by employees; F13: Greater accuracy is achieved through 360 feedbacks; F14: Exactly identify one's own development needs; F15: Generates a positive learning environment for employees; F16: Treats all people with respect; F17: Uses opportunities to develop and apply new skills and knowledge; F18: Encourages others to try new ideas; F19: Encourages others to share their opinions; F20: Exactly pinpoints what people are good at and where they have the potential to develop.

 

EMPIRICAL STRATEGY:

A sample was chosen to examine the leadership development of employees through 360 degree feedback system at IT companies in Bhubaneswar. We have developed, validated, and tested a typical for estimating development-affecting feedbacks in 360 degree feedback appraisal system. A structured questionnaire was used for data collection that asked respondents and questions aimed to help us in developing the very important leadership development feedback from the 360 degree feedback system. Twenty feedbacks were presented to respondents in this questionnaire, the method of the data was gathered through a survey questionnaire this involved survey questionnaires to employees in the field of human resource who have experience in this area which included 40 valid respondents working for many software companies in Bhubaneswar, and the design questionnaire was used for collecting data.

 

STATISTICAL METHOD:

The analysis of the questionnaire responses was conducted using mean, standard deviation, percent, and one way ANOVA. In order to find the reliable of the questionnaire a Chronbach Alpha is calculated and the values lie above the lower limit of 0.6.

 

Table 1: Factor Matrix, Cronbach's α by variable blocks with component-analysis extraction method.

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

Distribution Sample:

The Twenty questionnaires were submitted to respondents and all 20 were returned with responses. These 20 questionnaires were analyzed using one way ANOVA, frequency scales, and percentage. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 1.

 

Table 2: Distribution Sample According To Experience of Manager

The percentage of the 6-10years experience is greater than the percentage of 0-5years and more than 10years. The percentage of the 0-5years experience is 25, whereas the percentage of the 6-10years experience is 50. The percentage of more than 10years experience is 25.

 

Feedback ranking on leadership development:

The mean of all feedbacks is shown in Table 2. All respondents indicated that the 360 degree feedback is affecting to leadership development feedbacks F7, F14, F20, F17, F15, F18, F4, F19, F2, F5 were identified as very important in descending order of means were identified. The ranking on the basis of the importance of the listed feedbacks are F7, F14, F20, F17, F15, F18, F4, F19, F2, F5, F1, F3, F6, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F16.

 

Table 3:

Sl . No.	Feedback	N	Mean	Standard deviation	Percent
1	F7	40	4.55	0.503831	91%
2	F14	40	4.425	0.747217	88.5%
3	F20	40	4.375	0.740322	87.5%
4	F17	40	4.325	0.828576	86.5%
5	F15	40	4.275	0.986771	85.5%
6	F18	40	4.25	0.839719	85%
7	F4	40	4.2	0.939176	84%
8	F19	40	4.15	0.80224	83%
9	F2	40	4.15	1.075365	83%
10	F5	40	4.075	0.888314	81.5%
11	F1	40	4.05	1.299901	81%
12	F3	40	4	1.037749	80%
13	F6	40	3.95	0.932325	79%
14	F8	40	3.85	1.075365	77%
15	F9	40	3.75	1.149136	75%
16	F10	40	3.6	1.236206	72%
17	F11	40	3.425	1.217132	68.5%
18	F12	40	3.05	1.197219	61%
19	F13	40	2.85	1.188621	57%
20	F16	40	2.65	1.098951	53%

 

MEASURE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES:

Are there any significant differences in the judgment of feedbacks among experienced group of experienced of employees?

 

Table 4: Means and Standard Deviations among three experienced employees

Total	N	Mean	Std. deviation
2-5 years experience	10	3.6	0.665186
6-10 years experience	20	4.1	0.608163
More than 10 years experience	10	3.7	0.522281
Total	40	11.4	1.620947

 

Table 5: One Way ANOVA

ANOVA
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between Groups	2.040	2	1.020	2.803	.074
Within Groups	13.465	37	.364
Total	15.505	39

 

This table shows the calculated value is 2.803 and the table value at 0.05 significance level is 3.26. Since the calaculated value is less than the table value, there are no significant differences between the manager’s judgments of different experienced group of employees; hence the judgement of the employees under different experience group is uniform.

 

Figure 1:

 

This figure illustrates that Leadership development questionnaires are very important and employees are strongly agree with the questionnaires. The proposed figure belonging relation between experiences of manager and360 degree feedback leadership development.

CONCLUSION:

The concern of this study is estimating the feedbacks which impacts on leadership development through 360 degree feedback. The results indicated that there were 20 common 360 degree feedbacks. The 360 degree feedbacks are very important for employees leadership development. The feedbacks F7, F14, F20, F17, F15, F18, F4, F19, F2 and F5 were identified as very important and the feedbacks from 360 degree F1, F3, F6, F8, F9, F10, F11, F12, F13, F16 in descending means were identified as important which influence the employee ‘s leadership development. The overall ranking of importance is done for each feedback aspect of the three categories of experienced employees (2-5, 6-10, and more than 10). Based on these results, the companies must improve the leadership development of an employee through 360 degree feedback. The result shows there are no significant differences in the leadership development due to the experience of employees and this research demonstrates the positive effect of implementing a 360-degree feedback for employee leadership development. Furthermore, firms that employ the 360-degree appraisal system to encourage a healthy work environment. In the future, the researchers should be concerned with new techniques to improve employee leadership development.

 

REFERENCES:

1.          Bookman R. Tools for cultivating constructive feedback. Association Management. 1999; 51 (2):73-8.

2.          Caroline Bailey and Michelle Austin. 360 Degree Feedback and Developmental Outcomes: The Role of Feedback Characteristics, Self- Efficacy and Importance of Feedback Dimensions to Focal Employees' Current Role. International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 2006; 14 (1): 51-66.

3.          Gallagher T. 360-Degree Performance Reviews Offer Valuable Perspectives. Financial Execute. 2008; 24(10): 61.

4.          Gebelein, S.H., Kinard, W. and Mitchell, D. The challenges of making 360-degree performance appraisal work. Personnel Decisions Inc, Presentation and materials from the 1998 International Conference on Work Teams.1998.

5.          Greenberg, J. Promote procedural justice to enhance acceptance of work outcomes. In Locke, E.A. (Ed.), Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behaviour. Blackwell Publishing. Oxford 2004; pp. 181-96.

6.          Jones J.E. and Bearly W.L. 360-Degree Feedback: Strategies, Tactics, and Techniques for Developing Leaders, HRD Press, Amherst, MA.1996.

7.          Lepsinger R. and Lucia A. The Art and Science of 360[degrees] Feedback, Jossey-Bass-Pfeiffer, San Francisco, CA.1997.

8.          Mondy R. Human resources management. Harlow: Pearson; 2010; 11th ed: pp.512.

9.          Palaiologos A., Papazekos P, and Panayotopoulou L. Organizational justice and employee satisfaction in performance appraisal. Journal of European Industrial Training. 2011; 35(8): 826–840.

10.       Rogers, E., Rogers, C. W., and Metlay, W. (2002). Improving the payoff from 360-degree feedback. Human Resource Planning, 25(3).

11.       Rowland C. A. and Hall R. D. Organisational justice and performance: Is appraisal fair? EuroMed Journal of Business.2012; 7(3):280–293.

12.       Tyler, T. R. (1987). Conditions leading to value-expressive effects in judgments of procedural

13.       justice: A test of four models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.1987; 52(2): 333–344.

14.       Das U K and Panda J k. A Study on 360-Degree Feedback in Educational University With Reference To Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR).2015; 4 (4):1632-1634. DOI: 10.21275/SUB153465.

15.       Das U K and Panda J k. Studies on using 360 Degree Feedbacks on Management Skills and Leadership Development. SSRG International Journal of Economics and Management Studies.2016;3(6):1-5.Doi 10.14445/23939125/IJEMSV3I6P101.

16.       Wilson J. 360 appraisals. Training and Development.1997; Vol. 51: 44-46. Yukl G. and Lepsinger R. How to get the most out of 360-degree feedback, Training; 1995pp. 45-50.

 

 

 

 

 

Accepted on 11.08.2017          © A&V Publications all right reserved