The Surface Warfare community's 360-degree feedback pilot program : a preliminary analysis and evaluation plan

Abstract : The system known as 360-degree feedback, also called multi-source or multi-rater feedback, is a development program that provides a recipient with feedback from supervisors, peers, and subordinates. There is currently no institutionalized, Navywide 360-degree feedback program for leadership development. Due to widespread civilian acceptance and to the success of the 360-degree program for the Navy s flag officers, the 2004 Surface Warfare Commanders Conference recommended a pilot program for 360-degree feedback be tested on a portion of the Surface Warfare Officer community. Results of the pilot program will be used to inform decisions on implementation of a Navy-wide 360-degree feedback program. The objectives of this thesis were to review the research evidence in the literature on the effectiveness and best practices of 360-degree programs and to identify general program evaluation techniques. The thesis then presents a conceptual analysis of the Navy pilot program and makes recommendations for modifications to the program based on comparisons with empirical research evidence and identified best practices of 360-degree programs. The thesis concludes by developing some guidelines and recommendations for a program evaluation plan that can be used to assess or revise the pilot program during and after its implementation.

[1]  Sarah A. Hezlett,et al.  The impact of 360‐degree feedback on management skills development , 1993 .

[2]  P. Rossi,et al.  Evaluation: A systematic approach, 5th ed. , 1989 .

[3]  J F Brett,et al.  360 degree feedback: accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[4]  Richard R. Reilly,et al.  A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF UPWARD FEEDBACK , 1996 .

[5]  L. Atwater,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF UPWARD FEEDBACK ON SELF‐ AND FOLLOWER RATINGS OF LEADERSHIP , 1995 .

[6]  John Schaubroeck,et al.  A meta-analysis of self-supervisor, self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. , 1988 .

[7]  Allen I. Huffcutt,et al.  Psychometric properties of multisource performance ratings: A meta-analysis of subordinate, supervisor, peer, and self-ratings. , 1997 .

[8]  Chockalingam Viswesvaran,et al.  The moderating influence of job performance dimensions on convergence of supervisory and peer ratings of job performance: unconfounding construct-level convergence and rating difficulty. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[9]  Stéphane Brutus,et al.  Multisource assessment programs in organizations: An insider's perspective , 2002 .

[10]  A. H. Church,et al.  Advancing the State of the Art of 360-Degree Feedback , 1997 .

[11]  Chet Robie,et al.  A new look at within-source interrater reliability of 360-degree feedback ratings. , 1998 .

[12]  Fred Luthans,et al.  360-Degree feedback with systematic coaching: Empirical analysis suggests a winning combination , 2003 .

[13]  Katherine A. Karl.  The Art and Science of 360° Feedback , 1997 .

[14]  L. James,et al.  Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. , 1984 .

[15]  James W. Smither,et al.  A FIVE‐YEAR STUDY OF UPWARD FEEDBACK: WHAT MANAGERS DO WITH THEIR RESULTS MATTERS , 1999 .

[16]  Sarah A. Hezlett,et al.  TRAIT, RATER AND LEVEL EFFECTS IN 360‐DEGREE PERFORMANCE RATINGS , 1998 .

[17]  C. Achilles,et al.  Evaluation: A Systematic Approach , 1980 .

[18]  James M. LeBreton,et al.  The Restriction of Variance Hypothesis and Interrater Reliability and Agreement: Are Ratings from Multiple Sources Really Dissimilar? , 2003 .

[19]  R. Murphy.  Program Evaluation: Methods and Case Studies (3rd ed.). , 1990 .

[20]  G. J. Greguras,et al.  Manager attention to multisource feedback , 2003 .

[21]  Charles W. Rogers,et al.  Improving the Payoff from 360-Degree Feedback , 2002 .

[22]  Manuel London,et al.  Maximizing the Value of 360-degree Feedback: A Process for Successful Individual and Organizational Development , 1998 .

[23]  Wayne F. Cascio,et al.  Applied Psychology in Human Resource Management , 1998 .

[24]  M. C. Reed.  Utilization-focused Evaluation: The New Century Text (3rd ed.) , 1999 .

[25]  J. Ghorpade,et al.  Managing five paradoxes of 360-degree feedback , 2000 .

[26]  Elizabeth C. Thach.  The impact of executive coaching and 360 feedback on leadership effectiveness , 2002 .

[27]  Mark R. Edwards,et al.  360゜ feedback : the powerful new model for employee assessment & performance improvement , 1996 .

[28]  Walter C. Borman,et al.  History and development of multisource feedback as a methodology , 2001 .

[29]  Steven E. Scullen,et al.  Understanding the latent structure of job performance ratings. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[30]  G. Yukl,et al.  Effects of multisource feedback and a feedback facilitator on the influence behavior of managers toward subordinates. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[31]  Michael M. Lombardo,et al.  Knowledge Summary Series: 360-Degree Assessment , 2003 .

[32]  A. Kluger,et al.  The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. , 1996 .

[33]  James W. Smither,et al.  Accountability: The Achilles' Heel of Multisource Feedback , 1997 .

[34]  David Antonioni,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF FEEDBACK ACCOUNTABILITY ON UPWARD APPRAISAL RATINGS , 1994 .