iSixSigma

360 feedback

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General 360 feedback

Viewing 100 posts - 1 through 100 (of 115 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #35340

    Maurice M Bond
    Participant

    What is the best book out on implementation and use of “360” performance reviews.  Any comments on its’ effectiveness?
    MMB

    0
    #99057

    Gursimran Singh
    Participant

    Hi Maurice,
                         Check it out 360 Degree Feedback : The Powerful New Model for Employee Assessment & Performance Improvementby Mark R. Edwards, AnnJ.Ewen
    It is less academic and more informative.
    Regards,
    Gursimran Singh

    0
    #99065

    mman
    Participant

    I need to know also

    0
    #99074

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    mman,
    You guys should understand MSA by this point and realize what this is worth. You banking your career on a personality dependent system?
    Regards,
    Mike

    0
    #99089

    SSMBB
    Member

    Maurice,
    Before implementing any 360 feedback in your company, you should also take a look at Jack Welch’s book called Jack: Straight from the Gut. In his book, he mentioned that it was good at beginning but he ended up eliminating the process later because feedbacks were not honest and true feedbacks anymore.  We also went through similar experience.

    0
    #99109

    Ken Feldman
    Participant

    Doesn’t it depend on how the 360 will be used?  If there is a knee jerk to common cause variation, then the tool will be counterproductive.  If it is used as one more data point to help a manager become better, it has some value.  I have seen both good and bad outcomes from using this tool. 

    0
    #99119

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Darth,
    It doesn’t matter how it will be used. It violates every thing we understand about reliable data from a measurement system. It is and always will be opinion.
    How do you think Jack Eelch, Bill Gates, Steven Jobs, Linus Torvold (spelling), etc would do in these things? It is a tool that flattens out spikes by  normalizing the outliers. Inovation, breakthrough, etc primarily comes from outliers. It is a great tool for managers who do not want to get involved and are so mediocre or incompetant at their jobs that they cannot manage diversity.
    That is what I would want to do with my company. Let them pound each other until they are all clones. It is the HR equivalent answer to Gabriels question about how to get every cavity producing identical parts. Ask a question and everyone answers the same – what a team. Anyone remember the Bay of Pigs. It would have only taken one outlier to ask the right question.
    Sorry about the rant but this is one of the worst practices I have seen in years. We all seem to love Deming as long as his message supports what we wanted. What was his opinion about reviews? Now we open the doors so everyone can participate in this idiotic practice. Lets see I have a bad idea, how can I make it worse? I got it. Let everone participate then I don’t have to be responsible for any of the feedback regardless of its accuracy.
    Good luck.

    0
    #99125

    SSMBB
    Member

    Mike,
    I could not agree with you more! This is a highly subjective process, not to mention other flaws as mentioned in my previous note. If you are a change agent and the person who will give you a feed back is against change, how do you think he is going to rate you? How should you then be evaluated? Where is the MSA?

    0
    #99128

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    SSMBB,
    Thank you. This one of those posts where you hit the button (twice – that is NVA Mike – did you process map this?) and then go get a cup of coffee. You come back and read it and go “I am going to get my a_s kicked over this one.”
    Thanks for the support.
    Regards,
    Mike

    0
    #99143

    Ken Feldman
    Participant

    Mike,
    Hopefully you have calmed down a bit.  I agree that the 360 has some downsides especially if used in a punitive fashion.  But I could extend the same argument to any customer survey which asks for subjective and often emotional feedback about how a company is doing.  Yet, we do a lot of it and unfortunately, we over react to them as well by changing processes or jumping on people.  I never suggested that the 360 was perfect nor the only tool to assess leadership capabilities.  Certainly we use additional, more objective performance measures to assess leadership.  But let’s face it, people feel what they feel regardless of whether it is rational to someone else.  All feedback is useful.  I agree we should always consider the source and the measurement system which collected it before placing too much faith in its reliability.  And yes, it can be used used as a tool of revenge or vendetta, just like any customer feedback or opinion poll.

    0
    #99361

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Darth,
    Sorry about the delay in the response. Judging by the activity on the site you have been busy so it probably went unnoticed.
    When it comes to this idiotic ritual I do not calm down easily. I see a big gap between a well engineered customer survey that can be distributed randomly and acrutch for a weak manager and even more useless HR department that is looking for an easy way out: “Not my fault – that is just what they said. Mind closing the door and turning out the lights on the way out all you people keep interupting my nap. I am absolutely worn out. I have 150% on my plate.”
    This same enlightened group is the first to tell people we want them to “think out of the box.” For the most part it is a tired cliche. Next time someone tells you to do that just respond with “That seems like valuable advice. Thank you. How would you suggest I get started doing that? I have tried in the past and I keep coming up with the same things. Obviously you have done it successfully or else you would not be advising me to do it. How do you do it?” The truth is most don’t and most won’t because of the normalizing effect an organization has on people ho think outside the box. Send someone to training (just one person). Watch what happens when they return with new thoughts and ideas and try to talk to people about changing things. You will see the Tribal Status Quo Syndrome in action until they calm down and act like they used to (resume their established role in a well ordered society).
    That 360 nonsense is like giving the group a license to prescribe Ridlin to anyone who operates out of the box. That puts a company one step closer to mediocrity. We need those people from the “fringe” and the “edge.” The ones that skate on the other side of the ice.
    Just my opinion.

    0
    #99366

    Mike Allen
    Participant

    At a previous employer, we were forced to use the 360 degree (“rounded”) feedback; initially, it provided some value (the Hawthorn effect?), but quickly dissipated into another HR boondoggle (how many favors can you call in frm your Good Ol’ Boy network?).  As Mike inferred, it indirectly discourages risk-taking, since as part of implementing change, you need to challenge assumptions (and rock the boat a bit); then, as part of 360 degree feedback, you’re going to ask for “honest” feedback from some of those same people whose toes you may have stepped on (do you think the replies will be helpful or vindictive?).  Waiting for a once-a-year performance review is an exercise in futility for the manager and the employee.  Just my jaded opinion, but I feel there’s no substitute for rolling up your sleeves, establishing good working relationships, and giving feedback and guidance on a regular basis. 
    I see too many MBA-types throw around buzzwords like “empowerment”, “teamwork” and “total quality” without really understanding what they mean or walking the talk (it sure impresses the higher-ups, though!).  You can invent your own catch-phrases and sound intelligent in meetings, too (check out http://www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html or http://members.aol.com/matt999h/bullshit.htm); you’ll find yourself fitting in rather quickly.
    Thanks for listening to my rant.

    0
    #99421

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Mike,
    No worries on the rant. I did the same thing.
    I agree with you. This is a huge boondogle and a pain for everyone who has to suffer under the system. I don’t think that is jaded – it is perceptive.
    Regards,
    Mike

    0
    #99440

    Malcolm Upton
    Participant

    360 Feedback has fewer flaws than other performance evaluation tools. I’d say it is occasionally, slightly helpful instead of always worse than useless.

    0
    #99442

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    Funny you should say that.  I also have found that most HR eval tools are crap.  I like the 360 due to the data that can be collected from all aspects of a persons performance.  It is a great tool for finding out where problems exist between employee levels.  Few organization however take advantage of the real potential for 360 in the form of data analysis.  The look at it only as a feedback & eval tool, but the data contained in those evaluations is priceless when taking a holistic view of an organization!

    0
    #99447

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Tom,
    How is it that you consider this data?

    0
    #99458

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    As I am sure you know, 360 collects information based on an individuals performance from their supervisory chain, work peers, and subordinates to get a well rounded look at the individual.  Most organizations then use this information to make decisions based on that individual.  One of the training organizations that I have worked with then takes these evals from everyone in the organization and conducts a plot based on the management tree.  They sync the feedback and then compare it to workflow, productivity and other factors to identify gaps and bottlenecks in the organization.  I have then picked up on this info to conduct change management tied to Lean or Six Sigma.  I can quickly see where the problems are happening and often I am able to identify personnel that should not be kept on as an organization transitions.  And this is just one way to use the data!

    0
    #99459

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Tom,
    That is probably where we differ in usefulness. I do not see that as data and even if you do without some type of MSA it is very low quality data.
    That by definition makes the evaluations questionable. Peoples entire carreers are put at stake based on these smiles tests. If I roll up nough responses around the organization I might be able to extrapolate something useful (probably very onvious as well) about the organization. You have qualitative data wrapped around small sample sizes. There isn’t any redeeming value here.
     

    0
    #99461

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    Yes careers are at stake, but I would disagree with you on the usefulness of the information.  I would never use it as a stand alone tool, but it can lead in directions that help to solve problems.  As an example.  An organization I was working with was conducting Lean training and trying to implement Lean practices.  One of the senior supervisors was a major supporter of the program.  By coincedence the 360 rotation was due during this time and the info collected showed that that same senior supervisor while speaking support was doing everything he could to derail the program.  He had two years left til retirement and did not want to have to deal with the amount of change that was connected with Lean.  He accepted a transfer into a different area that was not scheduled to be part of the implementation and was very happy about it and much of the rest of the implementation went quite well.
    Small sample sizes should not be left unconsidered just because they are small and neither should qualitative data.  It may not hold the same level of confidence as quantitative data but it can be used for inference or gauging effect.  It is very subjective and I have yet to see an MSA tool other than the human brain that can make the connections and ensure the data is useable, but like I said…I never use it as “stand alone”.

    0
    #99462

    Stevo
    Member

    Mike, I’m not sold on 360’s either, however if you send out a surveys to 10 peers, 10 direct reports and a couple of managers and all of the “data” comes back negitive, is not there value in that?
     
    Stevo

    0
    #99464

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Stevo,
    If 10 out of 10 come back bad and you had to do a 360 to see it there is value in that. The information you just got was that you are out of touch with your people, have no leadership talent and you are probably even a s—ty manager.
    That belongs on your own review.

    0
    #99467

    CAR
    Participant

    Mike
    Why to get personal
     

    0
    #99468

    Rog
    Member

    I have to say I’m with you on this one Mike even though I have no idea what 360 evaluation is. If you have to rely on a paperwork excersise to tell you how your staff are performing or are percieved then you aren’t getting out enough….which means you probably aren’t doing a good job yourself.  Whatever happened to talking to people. I think I’ll stick to the Management By Walking About philosophy.
    Enjoyable thread to read this one.

    0
    #99470

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Tom,
    If we are going to do antidotes lets resort back to Deming (this may be off a little) “A man within 2 years of retirement has no fear.” Maybe you should have spent a little more time with him – he wasn’t afraid to to push back – maybe everyone else was.
    I assume from your posts that you have some understanding of measurement systems, sample size, and types of data. This is a worst case scenario – no MSA, small sample size on subjective data and you are going to make judgements about the most valuable asset your company has – its people. You show your products more respect – or at least most do.
    So far I have not seen you come up with one thing that justifies the risk. The plane old MBWA is a better system. Get off your butt, pick up the paychecks every Friday, hand everyone their paycheck and thank them for the work they did that week. In a month they will tell you anything you want to know and you have time to see for yourself rather than rush to take the input because the reviews are due tomorrow. Some may actually do their job and work with their people to develop them since they are actually doing their job daily rather than once per year.
    Lets see which idea works best. I amgoing to stay in touch with everyone constantly so I understand and mentor my people or once a year I do the groundhog thing, pop out of my hole tell you if you did a good job (at which point I motivate you for the next 24 hours) or I tell you did a crappy job (at which point I demotivate you for the next year).
    Mediocre people get mediocre reviews. The people who get hurt in this system are the outliers – good and bad. So do you want to work in a mediocre company (at least as long as they are in business)?

    0
    #99472

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    car,
    There wasn’t anything personal in there. Try reading it a little closer.

    0
    #99473

    Ken Feldman
    Participant

    Mike, did you have a bad experience with a 360 in elementary school?  :-).

    0
    #99475

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Car,
    My comment to you was personal.

    0
    #99477

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Rog,
    We evidently think alike. I used the MBWA in another response.
    Regards,
    Mike

    0
    #99478

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Darth,
    Nope. Doing 360’s runs so counter to everything we do on the Q side but all the A siders feel better. Personally They need to walk their dog, drink some herbal tea or something if they want to feel better. This stuff sucks.
    Regards,
    Mike

    0
    #99481

    CAR
    Participant

    Mike
    I thought “you are probably even a s—ty manager” is personal

    0
    #99483

    Ken Feldman
    Participant

    Mike, you have to stop sugar coating things and really tell us how you feel about 360s.

    0
    #99486

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    I actually like Management By Walking Around!  But you want to talk about a small sample size!  MBWA only works to show that senior leaders are interested in whats going on.  There is no way they could ever have enough time to really look into any problem very deeply.  And when a consultant comes into an organization, they have even less time to spend outside of their primary tasks.
    I cant believe I am going to say this but…I have to disagree with Deming!  Especially for this day and age.  People within 2 years are retirement are full of fear!  The differences of retirement pay for retiring early are huge.  In fact I would say that the folks who are close to retirement are the most fearful in the organizations I have worked with.  They are afraid of technology, they are afraid they are not educated enough to make decisions, they are afraid of any change that moves them out of their comfort zone and the track to an easy retirement.  Old dogs can learn new tricks, but most would rather not.
    I agree that people are the greatest asset an organization has.  The intellectual capital held in the brains of long term workers is invaluable, but sometimes it is best to move people into positions to take advantage of that asset rather than allowing that asset to act as a roadblock to change.  I never recommend that an organization lets anyone go unless they absolutely have to.  If you are not growing you are dying and firing people sets a bad precident that the workers you have left see and they loose trust in your organization.
    That all being said…I will take and look at data and information collected by an organization from many different sources.  You cant do MSA on everything, some things are just too subjective, but can be used if you understand the liabilities and the fallibility of the data.

    0
    #99487

    Mikel
    Member

    Car,
    Let me help Mike out, even though he doesn’t need the help.
    If you have to do a 360 to know one of your employees is bad, you are a s___y manager. Why don’t you already know and why are you not already dealing with it?

    0
    #99488

    Stevo
    Member

    Mike, that’s my point, there are a lot of @%$! managers out there, and some are not willing to make the hard calls without a crutch.  And yes a was a &^%4! manager, that why I’m now a BB.
    Stevo

    0
    #99489

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    Mike,
    Evaluation is a process by which we are able to document and quantify the value a person provides to an organization.  As a Six Sigma guy you must be able to see some value in that.  Only once that is established can we measure to determine a persons impact on the customer and reduce varriation in output.  It also allows us to determine which employees should be promoted or removed.  MBWA can only give a snapshot and often leads to poor decision making…thats why it died, it also had no documantation.  It is a provider of “good feelings” for folks to see the boss interested in what they are doing, for that reason I like to use it.  But I would never base decisions on it.

    0
    #99490

    BeenThereDoneThat
    Participant

    I was training some MBBs at GE with the HR MBBs and Quality Leader for HR in the room. When we were talking about Gage R&R, I gave an example of doing a Gage R&R for the annual HR performance review session so famous at GE. During the training of HR people, they are given a number of portfolios of candidates and asked to assess the placement of them in the High/Medium/Low categories. This is part of their standard introduction to the GE system.
    I suggested that a good Six Sigma project in HR would be a Gage R&R project to assess the effectiveness of the HR training procedure in evaluation.
    “How good are you at coming to the same conclusion for the same profile?” – We would present the same portfolios to the HR trainees over a period of time, scrambling the personal information enough, and separating the multiple evaluations in time to prevent the trainees from merely repeating the same numbers. We would have the precision/repeatability.
    “How good are you at coming to the right answer?” – We would also compare the scores for the trainees with the “standard” evaluations of the same profiles by the HR professionals. We would have the accuracy/reliability.
    “How well do you agree with the other people receiving the same HR training?” – We would compare the scores for the same profiles between each trainee. We would have the operator(HR trainee) effect.
    It is straighforward to correct for time differences and find out whether the procedure is a valid one – all using ANOVA, etc.
    The control part of the project was to continue the support of the trainees in a mentoring fashion until the trainees came to the “right” answer repeatedly and reliably. Evaluations of test portfolios could be incorporated into the ongoing evalaution of the HR professionals.
    The cost of quality was promoting or firing the wrong person – a tricky thing to evaluate, so we planned to use Monte Carlo and historical records of evaluations and career movement of people within GE.
    Everyone agreed that this was a good application of Six Sigma in HR.
    WRONG!
    Later in the week, I found out the legal department vetoed the project against the recommendations of the MBBs and the Quality Leader.
    GE never wanted to have documentation that there might be a problem with evaluations that are used to decide whether to promote, encourage, or fire people.
    True story.

    0
    #99491

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    You are taking this out of the original context.  As a supervisor you should not need a 360 on one of your subordinates.  As a manager, executive, or cunsultant, you dont have time to “know” all about every person who works in your organization.  Corrolating data from 360 evals can give senior leaders a “look” at the organization as a whole and can give some data & info that can be used in conjunction with other data to make better decisions.

    0
    #99492

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    WOW…and again…WOW!!! 

    0
    #99495

    SSNewby
    Member

    What a nice abstract little world you consultants and academicians live in.  360’s are a tool, a single tool, in an effective manager’s toolkit.  You have to know when, how, and why to use them.  They can’t take the place of knowing the business, the organizational imperatives, and the strengths and weaknesses of your people.   They can, and should, be used in conjunction with other performance excellence tools, e.g., structured and integrated goals, developmental plans, and performance appraisals.   Where I see the benefit of using 360’s is not in telling you something about your employee, it is in telling the employee something about him/herself.   Frequently people no matter how clear and direct you try to be with them just don’t see themselves as others do.  That is, in my humble opinion, the almost singular benefit of using 360’s – the resultant epiphany.  

    0
    #99496

    Ken Feldman
    Participant

    I think you make a good point Newby.  In many of the applications of 360 that I have been aware of, the info that is given to the Manager is kept confidential with recommendations to discuss the results with the various groups to get clarification, if needed.  Fortunately, I haven’t seen the punitive use as others have indicated.  A tool, any tool, if used improperly will be destructive.  I have actually seen control charts used for evaluation purposes and put into the personnel file.  Out of control points were deemed “bad”.  You can imagine how those employees feel about that tool.  As Newby said, at best it is a good look into the mirror without the reflection declaring that you are the fairest of them all.  Used to control behavior, it probably sucks as Mike so eloquently put it.

    0
    #99498

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    Thanks for the epiphany!

    0
    #99506

    howe
    Participant

    I found the 360 process useful and tend to agree with SSnewby, its not there for the manager its for the employee. It allowed me to improve my understanding of the perceptions people have of me, even from people who I had close effective working relations with!
    For me, it was about improving my understanding of how my behaviors affected others. 

    0
    #99517

    Rog
    Member

    Prof Tom,
    MBWA is not restricted to senior management. Anyone in a supervisory role should be doing some MBWA. In my book it’s not the job of senior managers to be the first line decision makers about departmental staffing issues. Isn’t that why we have line manager’s?
    Being seen to take an active interest is proabably one of the best things any manager can do.
    Rog

    0
    #99518

    Rog
    Member

    Prof Tom
    I don’t know about 360 but assume it is like many other appraisals a once a year thing. Which makes it also a snapshot. So how is a documented annual snapshot any more valuable than a continual observance of dynamic issues?
    Rog

    0
    #99521

    Mike Allen
    Participant

    Prof. Tom,
    In discussing the 360 degree feedback approach, you make the statement “…It also allows us to determine which employees should be promoted or removed.”  Since this is a once-a-year thing, how can it be a better measurement system than MBWA (a once-a-day snapshot)?  Contrary to your opinion, I feel that MBWA hasn’t died, there’s just less managers who will get off their duff and interact with their people on a daily basis.  Having the boss interested and supporting what employees are doing is a good thing.  Being a good manager, like being a good parent, is an inexact science, requiring building of trust, mutual respect and teamwork (as a manager, your “kids” are usually more responsible and take initiative if you let them).  I believe in immediate reinforcement of good behavior (catch people doing things right!); then, the negative behavior usually diminishes; waiting for the once-a-year head-nodding is too late.  Not to throw catch-phrases around, but this is a big part of the difference between being a manager and being a leader.

    0
    #99523

    Ken Feldman
    Participant

    Thank God for email and technology.  That way no Manager ever has to leave his/her desk to “speak with people”.  In fact, they don’t even have to leave home.  Maybe we could use video cams instead of that exhausting walking around thing.  In fact, knowing what is going on with your people and processes can be downright depressing.  Better to take the ostrich approach to management.  Unfortunately, with your head in the sand the your butt in the air……nasty.

    0
    #99524

    Mikel
    Member

    TMI – I hope I can get the image out of my head.

    0
    #99525

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Car,
    You took it out of context. Stevo posted about a hypothetical situation and I responded to that situation. That was why I told you to read the post again. Obviously twice doesn’t do much for your comprehension ability either – that was personal.
    Stick with the issue.

    0
    #99527

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Stan,
    Thanks.

    0
    #99530

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    SSNewby,
    For being your humble opinion your post didn’t start out that way.
    First I don’t want to speak for the academicians but I do not know a single consultant who went to college and then became a consultant. Why would you make that comment about our world? Actually at this time I have backed away from consulting until next year so I will assume you are not speaking to me.
    If I take you list of where they should be used “They can, and should, be used in conjunction with other performance excellence tools, e.g., structured and integrated goals, developmental plans, and performance appraisals.” how does that compensate for the fact that you are applying probably some of the worst data you have in your business to measure the best asset in your business. We have lots of goals, systems and plans, etc around our products. Why don’t we all get together at the end of the line and vote on whether or not we feel it is a good one? Because that would be stupid but we are willing to do it to an employee?
    You can wrap all kinds of wonderful philosophical nonsense around it and at the end of the day it is junk data.

    0
    #99532

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Darth,
    A control chart? That is like having a control chart attached to a random number generator. That makes the MSA even more critical.

    0
    #99533

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Darth,
    I keep trying. Nobody wants to address the quality of the measurement system – good thing this isn’t a forum for people who are involved in a data driven discipline.

    0
    #99534

    Mike Allen
    Participant

    Mike, I agree that understanding others’ perceptions of us and our impact on others is important, but wouldn’t it better to receive that input immediately, rather than running the gauntlet once a year?  As part of building relationships with people, I like to routinely ask for informal feedback.  You can usually find a few people in each area to form postive relationships with, and periodically ask for their honest feedback.  If they trust and respect you, you’ll get some great feedback and advice, with no hidden agendas (doesn’t cost much, either).  Following this up with something more formal, such as an annual summary, doesn’t necessarily hurt, but is less necessary (most organizations probably use an annual review process in place of the day-to-day MBWA, and hence it has little value).
    Just my opinion (armed with this and 50 cents, you can probably buy today’s newspaper).
    TTFN,
    Mike

    0
    #99535

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Tom,
    In the words of Woodward and Bernsteirn that is a nondenial denial. You wrote a whole paragraph full of round words and by the end you hadn’t said anything.
    Why have you classified MBWA as a snapshot? Nobody ever wrote it up like that. That looks like more opinion. Yo already got hammered for the notion that it was a tool for upper management which it was never presented that way. I had 76 people who worked for 4 supervisors on the FMU-139 line (the one Mario Perez Wilson refers to) If I was there on Friday I passed out paychecks. I assured I spoke everyone evey week. You get to know your people and you work the issues all week every week. You don’t manage spikes.

    0
    #99536

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Darth,
    Lets not forget the opportunity to email them the 360 either.

    0
    #99537

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Stevo,
    As long as we understand our limitations. I am a s—ty employee that was why I became a consultant. The goal is to have no special events – when we achieve the goal I get bored and typically end up in trouble. This seems to work out best for me.
    Good luck. 

    0
    #99539

    Ken Feldman
    Participant

    Will forward that idea to our mutual friends at R&S for a new product, thanks.  Maybe it will help Peter pay off the wedding and your bar bill.

    0
    #99540

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Mike,
    I liked your first post. You are obviously better equiped to not get as emotional about this as I do.
    If I were locked into the 360 nonsense it would make it even more imperative to do MBWA (or something like it regardless of what you call it). That would be the only way I would know if the evaluation had any integrity. They don’t say anything all year and then blast them in a review?
    The other isuue is that you will get those odd personalities that are your out of box thinkers. In general they are not going to survive this process – particularly if you have a manager who is so enlightened that they will make promotion and firing decisions based on the bad data. There is some quote that “reasonable men fit themselves to the world and unreasonable men try to make the world fit them therefor all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” How well will those people do in a 360? Suppose a couple hundred years ago one of your employees was seen by some of his fellow workers flying a kite in the rain – might not do well next review.
    We push BB’s, MBB’s, & GB’s to question the rituals and test the beliefs. They are tasked to drive change. You do 360’s and there is a good chance you will end up firing the good ones and promoting the bad ones.
    Good luck. 

    0
    #99542

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    The 360 may be done once a year (some organizations do it more often) but the input isnt based on what happened that day.  It is made up of the cumulative opinions of everyone around the individual that they have formed by working directly with that person through the year.
    I am not discounting MBWA, I think that it has its uses especially for smaller organizations and direct supervisors, however, in larger organizations it is just not practical for senior leaders to MBWA with thousands of employees.

    0
    #99543

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Darth,
    Maybe the wedding but won’t dent the bar bill. To many wonderful sunsets, great beaches, and you can dance until 3-4 in the morning (regardless of how badly you dance: define 2-3-4, measure 2-3-4, etc)
    Good luck.

    0
    #99545

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Tom,
    On a good day that is naive at best. Any smiles test is affected directly by what has just happened. The half life of learning is about 24 hours (by some research) – that creates a problem for objectivity immediately.

    0
    #99546

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    Ha Ha…now thats personal!  Your opinion of the usefulness of a set of data is just that…an opinion.  Everything does not have to fit into a narrow catagory and have an MSA done on it to be considered useful data or information.  That would lead to analysis paralysis and nothing would ever get done.  If 360 data and info can help as just one tool in the decision making process then there is no reason that it should not be used.

    0
    #99548

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    Mike,
    Do you not think that people who use that information realize that?  Of course the latest things that have been happening in the work place are going to come to the forfront in any feedback system, but that does not mean that there is not useful information contained in the report.
    The halflife of learning that has not been applied is very short, but there is a large difference between learning and working relationships.  Most people take the “smiles” test as you call it very seriously and much of the training that accompanies the use of the 360 directs the participant to actively add input during the year so that it is not just a current snapshot.
    Performance feedback is difficult at best, but it is a good source of organizational information.

    0
    #99549

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Tom,
    Yes it was.
    MSA is not opinion. It isn’t my definition – it is an industry standart based in statistics that quantifies the acceptability of the measurement system. If we were to talk about a sampling plan such as this for hardware any decent BB would immediately fix it. All of a sudden when we are going to use it to evaluate employees it is good enough.
    Not only is it good enough You want to use it for promotiom and firing. Lets look at that effect – the outliers good and bad get fired. The people who score best by their collegues are the ones most like themselves so they get promoted and perpetuate a system that accomodates the one type of personality. Sounds a little to incestuous for me. The up side is it makes reviews easier (for the manager) and any bad result – “don’t look at me they said it. I am just telling you what they said. Would you like a cup of hebal tea?”

    0
    #99551

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Tom,
    Unfortunately most don’t care. They are complying with some inane system that was directed by a part of the organization that wants to be able to use the catch phrase 360 and has no understanding of the quality of the junk they just threw into the system – how come the old “garbage in garbage out” some how doesn’t apply here? It is just another cute saying we use when it is convenient.
    So performance is difficult to measure. Ok – so what? That sounds a lot like it isn’t worth the effort.

    0
    #99552

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    I was talking about your opinion of the usefulness of the 360 data and yes I could use some herbal tea!
    But you are going way past my desire to use this data.  I use it only as part of the information to make decisions, to throw away any data just becuase you dont like the source seems suspect.
    MSA is a great standard that I use all the time…where it works best and can provide the greatest value…but not on everything.

    0
    #99553

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    But it is worth the effort if done correctly.  Yes, just like many of the new processes like TQM of the past 360 is used by some organizations becuse the head of HR thinks it sounds good.  Human performance is the greatest cause of Muda and Varriation.  360 is just the best performance feedback tool I have seen yet that give a broad view of the individual and can be combined as a look at the organization.

    0
    #99554

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    Thats great as a direct manager…but what if you had 1000?

    0
    #99555

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Tom,
    The assumption that people are the greatest cause of Muda and variation is pure unaduterated crap. You must not have done many SS projects. That is a repetitive part of every deployment. The hypothesis tests, multivari charts, etc that people do on other people. Very rarely is it significant.
    TPS has the first 2 steps focused on people induced variation. That gets fixed by cleaning up the area, putting things in place that should have been there in the first place, getting junk out, visual workplace, standardized work, etc. and those are issues of poor systems and management. You claimed you didn’t want to run counter to Deming on the person within 2 years of retirement. You need to catch up on some reading. First he had no use for reviews and second he attributed most of the issue in the work place to the management system. Basic Pareto stuff – why are we putting so much effort into evaluating this part of the organization when they typically are doing what they believe we want in a system we defined?

    0
    #99556

    Mikel
    Member

    From your statement, I suspect you don’t really understand MSA.

    0
    #99557

    Diaconu
    Participant

    I guess a once a year question would have to be ‘how do you feel about ‘x’ on average for the past 12 months’. The answer might very well depend on which side of bed the interviewee got out of that day or indeed the question that preceded this one, or who asked the question, or whether or not the interviewee knows why the question is being asked.
    The benefit if asking many questions informally is that a) you get an average view formed from many different contexts rather than a view of an average from a single context b) the preceding questions are usually different ones c) There is no formal outcome that depends on the answer given.
    The value of asking many questions more frequently is that your answers come from a wider sample population and therefore will give you a better indication of that persons ‘normal’ behavior.
    I would not expect to see the CEO of my business walk the floor of my site more than once a year. It’s large company and he doesn’t make the decision on my performance review. My line manager does and I see him frequently. The amount of communication has to be appropriate.
    Mia

    0
    #99558

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Tom,
    You are thrashing around now. I have never seen anyone with 1000 direct reports. Please provide an example.
    If anyone does have 1000 direct reports they have the flatest organization ever and they obviously do not understand “span of control” at least not effective span of control. That is another management issue – if it exists, it is an outlier and you are rationalizing a bad position.

    0
    #99560

    Diaconu
    Participant

    Prof Tom
    If I was a manager and I had 1000 direct reports the first thing I’d do is appoint some line managers/supervisors so that I could deal with 20 or so of them and they could deal with 50 or so of their direct reports. how are they going to get any kind of leadership If I don’t do that?
    I may be responsible for the cleaning staff but that doesn’t mean that I directly manage them.
    Mia

    0
    #99563

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Mia,
    That is called span of control.

    0
    #99564

    Stevo
    Member

    Mike, don’t worry I like consultants (taste like chicken).  let’s test your theory.  Here my 360 feedback.
    Mike does not play well with others.
    Was that helpful?
    Will that feedback create change in you?
     
    Doing my part,   – Stevo

    0
    #99566

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    As organizations move to a flat structure this is not always an option.  In a perfect world relationships within the work structure would provide all the information a manager would need…we just cant afford to work that way anymore.

    0
    #99568

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    I call it spam of control…it is canned and tasteless.

    0
    #99569

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    You are funny!!!!

    0
    #99570

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Stevo,
    Ok maybe that explains why my MBB from Oz defines “Team” as Totally Engaged Assisting Mike.
    I was taking that as a compliment.
    Have a great weekend.
    Time to ride into the sunset for the weekend. It is winter down here and the Andes are already topped in snow – que lindo.

    0
    #99571

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Tom,
    How profound.

    0
    #99577

    Mike Allen
    Participant

    Allowing a manager to base promotions and firings on 360 degree feedback is like giving a bazooka to a blind man…
    Thinking like a Quality Engineer, using just the 360 degree feedback is a crude form of QC from HR; MBWA is more QA-oriented, because it’s proactive (not to say we can’t use the 360 degree feedback to supplement our MBWA, but if your MBWA is effective, you really shouldn’t need it).
    A more plausible analogy: you can program your automated data collection and SPC system with all the alarm rules you like (great show-and-tell for customer visits), but there’s still no substitute for reviewing the chart with the operators on the production floor, and asking, “is there a non-random variable pattern here we need to pay attention to here?”

    0
    #99578

    SSNewby
    Member

    Mike,
     
    And your emotional rant, describing the insufficiency of data derived by using 360’s, is supported by data?    For a person who is typically very calm, logical and fact-based in his postings, you have really gone nuts on this topic.    By the way, you are sooooo sensitive.  I was joking about the abstract world of consultants and academicians – I plan to be there myself someday. 
     SSNewby

    0
    #99580

    Ken Feldman
    Participant

    One little issue to keep in mind here when comparing MBWA and the 360.  The “data” collected by the 360 is pretty much anonymous with composite results given.  If the group filling it out is large enough it affords some individual “protection”.  Walking around and doing face to face to see how things are going often results in smoke being blown up the manager’s butt.  Anonymous feedback which gives overall impressions may be more representative of people’s true feelings than what someone may say to your face.  Agreed, that the content of the anonymous feedback must be evaluated carefully to assess its usefulness but let’s face it, bloodbath or not, if that’s how they feel then it is reality to them.

    0
    #99584

    John H.
    Participant

    Mike
    Good Points!
    Odd genuises like the Great Mathematician Archimedes would not be hired or possibly fired under the 360 system. In Archimedes case, he was so focused in his investigations that his servants had to bathe him and his perculiar behaviour eventually led to his death by a Roman soldier. The creative mechanical devices that he invented delayed the Roman Army’s conquest of Syracuse Sicily. Playful eccentrics like the late Nobel Prize winning physicist Richard Feynman even taunted their Psychological Testers.
    Companies which have large and rigid “Techno-Bureaucracies” will eventually fail in a rapidly changing World economy because of the illness of “paralysis by analysis” and their predicable patterns of behaviour.
    My $.02
    John H.
     

    0
    #99601

    Tierradentro
    Participant

    What an interesting string!  I apologize if anyone’s already made this comment – but I worked for a company with a pretty serious Six Sigma program that had a 360 degree review process.  Here’s what I found objectionable about the 360 process – 1.  people were not trained on how to give the 360 reviews, so you got a whole lot of feedback like “John is fun to word with or John is good at his job, or John is a pain in the neck, I wish he’d give all his fancy statistics a rest.”  In this company, I don’t think that the 360 degree review is worthwhile, because I wasn’t able to use any of this feedback to improve my performance. 
    I guess if the HR dept would get off their rear ends and train some people on how to do these evaluations rather than limiting their scope to “sexual harassment training, hiring and firing and benefits” maybe the 360 degree would  be more effective!  (Wait a minute, isn’t training an important part of teaching people how to measure?)
    Anyway, I think that most review processes 360 degrees or otherwise are flawed, because they involve human perception, thus opinions. If at some point I’m eventually able to manage some folks, I plan on using the Management By Walking Around, keeping the lines of communication as open as possible, and as far as the HR required annual review – I’ll jump through the hoops just like everyone else.

    0
    #99603

    Ken Feldman
    Participant

    John, you are correct in stating that most of the behavioral surveys are perceptions of the persons being asked.  Well, what else is there if you are going to ask people?  You can walk around all day but what people tell you is still going to be their perceptions and personal interpretations of what is going on.  As I said in an earlier post, the problem with face to face is that you are likely going to get smoke blown up your butt.  I do agree that if your feedback consists of “John is fun to work with” then it is useless.  I also agree that if the feedback is “John is disrespectful and makes me feel bad” it is still not very directive.  But enough of them may get you to reflect upon yourself.  Unfortunately, the specific actions to improve may be hard to figure out.  Certainly the more specific the feedback is, the more useful.  But, put yourself in the respondent’s place…too much specificity and anonymity is out the window.  No great solution and frankly, I pretty much tossed the 360s done on me in the past because I couldn’t figure out what to do differently, given the feedback.  I had one CEO who just refused to do it with his direct reports.  It was good for them to do with their people but since he was the CEO, tough…he didn’t care what they thought.  So, John, your goal is to be CEO so all of this is moot.

    0
    #99641

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    John & Darth,
    I certainly don’t want to get wrapped around the axel again this week over this completely inane process but……
    You both make the case that the process is flawed (deeply) particularly if the manager is not engaged (sounds like some Champions?). The idea of being engaged – hearing the perceptions – coaching continuously (as opposed to managing once per year) allows you to take the comments and act on them continuously. You can use the MBWA or whatever suits you. At the end of the day it is getting involved rather than being a spectator.
    The answer to a question by Darth earlier in the string – in recent history I watched an extremely competent person get rated below average because they were reviewed by a person who was completely incompetant. Was the system poorly administered. No. It performed exactly the way it was planned which shows the lack of understanding in how to use these things.
    Johns comment about training – exactly. The same way you work through other Attribute GR&R’s. A 360 is a gage – a bad one at best.
    Regards,
    Mike 

    0
    #102095

    billybob
    Participant

    Hello Mr. Mike,
    I hate to reopen this thread,….but what do you do with a manager that bases change on preceptions? 
    Thanks,
    Billybob

    0
    #102098

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Billybob,
    Good morning. Seeing that thread show up again drew my attention immediately.
    I believe there are two strategies for these people (getting them fired usually does not work and adults are difficult to change). The fastest is if you can get a copy of their resume (CV) send it to as many recruiters as possible. If that does not work or you can’t get a copy of the resume work your butt of to make them look successful and get them promoted.
    Just my opinion.
    Regards,
    Mike

    0
    #102103

    Wayne
    Member

    Gee Mike….. you really are an idiot.    Just my opinion.

    0
    #102106

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    wayne,
    Thank you. Have a nice day.

    0
    #102107

    Wayne
    Member

    Mike, you’re welcome.  Have a nice day also.  

    0
    #102109

    Ken Feldman
    Participant

    Congratulations, you have a Forum Fan just like Stan.  But, at least yours is polite.

    0
    #102111

    Wayne
    Member

    Forum Fan?   No.   I have no desire to play tag with anyone – not with Mike or you “Darth”.    Inane postings, mine included, waste everyone’s time.    (I just stopped.)

    0
    #102112

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Darth,
    Thank you. I notice you have a couple as well.
    Actually posting on here is just like publishing a book or an article – you get some one who thinks your an idiot and then you get emails that say they liked what you did.
    Way to early to get excited about.
    Regards,
    Mike
     

    0
    #102113

    Prof. Tom
    Participant

    But no worse than any other HR gage out there…and maybe a little better.  And really, some information is better than no information at all when used by people who understand the limitations.

    0
    #102114

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    wayne,
    “inane?” – I hope you looked it up. Someone asked for my opinion an I gave it. Both methods work and it is more intelligent that trying to get them fired.
    Regards,
    Mike 

    0
    #102115

    Not Your Fan
    Participant

    Darth,
    You don’t know what you’re talking about. You have been doing the same thing (teaching the same thing over and over) for the past God knows how many years. You use this forum as your CHAT ROOM, and you think you’re contributing!
     
    Once again, you’ve been using this forum as your personal chat room.
     

    0
    #102122

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Prof. Tom,
    Normally I agree or at least don’t strongly disagree with your posts – until now.
    I read this before I went to lunch and thought about if I wanted to get back into a discussion around this stupid abdication of responsibility by management and Human Resources. (Thank you very much Mr. Billybob).
    Using your logic – having a compass that points somewhere other than magnetic north and changes where it points randomly – is better than having no compass at all? That doesn’t make any sense. Why would I be willing to place the review of the people who are working with me in the hands of a 360 review when you could set goals with metrics – other than kissing the butt of everyone on site so you get a good 360? Why is it that the department that is the advocate for the employee and uses all the soft talk can’t bother to figure out a decent measurement system? It is consensus management which means nobody is responsible.
    The logic doesn’t work for me.
    Regards,
    Mike

    0
    #102124

    howe
    Participant

     
    Mike,
    Mike Carnell,
    360 feedback at best, works only in its first year of implementation. It falls apart after that for various reasons. To list one reason, employees are afraid of giving negative feedback to their bosses. There are many more reasons. Jack Welch mentioned this in his latest book. And surprise, we experienced the exact same thing in our company (it is not GE).  So it was dropped.
     
     

    0
Viewing 100 posts - 1 through 100 (of 115 total)

The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.