360 Reviews - Providing Input

What 360 vendor do you recommend?

Mark - In the cast you mentioned a vendor you really like. What 360 vendor(s) do you recommend for managers?

6 Directs Minimum

Why are 6 directs the minimum required to assure anonymity?

Because of the 6 point Likert scale? I don't understand?

360 vendor

The vendor my company used is Personnel Decisions International, www.personneldecisions.com. Although we don't conduct regular, periodic 360 reviews, I have both been reviewed as well as provided feedback to others through this service, and the process was very well executed. They did a good job of protecting anonymity, although I do believe they use the 3-respondent rule mentioned in the cast.

The output from my review was fairly actionable in and of itself, and certainly was useful in finding other resources for self development.

Hope this helps!

~Bill

Predicated on Fear

I didn't realize that our fear of retribution should outweigh honest feedback. My first thought was "Why should we withhold valuable feedback when asked to provide it?" But you quickly explained away all the pretenses that this question was formed on.

You are right though that the risk of costs associated with providing negative feedback when the REA conditions are not met 100%, outweight any positive change in behavior that the feedback might provide. I said might because we don't know how the reviewed person will react, so who wants to guess about the outcome.

What it comes down to for me is that this is an all or nothing thing. Do it right like M&M have shown, or don't try at all. You provided the out that I was looking for to all of this when you said something to the effect of "Develop a relationship with your boss"

It's all about people, right?

-Nate

Real World Testimonial

Indeed, if the REA standard is not met, one should stay far, far away from any negative responses.  I'll give you my real world example:

When I was just starting my professional career, I was given the opportunity during a triennial inspection by corporate to provide "anonymous" verbal feedback on my supervisor.  I went on a diatribe regarding his lack of ability to delegate, insensitivity to employee issues, etc.  If that wasn't enough, I then provided "feedback" about my skip.  I was surprised when my supervisor and skip called me on the carpet after the inspection team left, a transcript of my "anonymous" comments in hand, and proceeded to label me as "the biggest morale problem in the office."  Ouch.  I was given some "developmental opportunities" (in the mail and file rooms) but I eventually made things better with my manager.  In fact, I later realized my boss was actually one of the best I've ever had and moved on to be his #2.  I never quite patched things up with my skip, though.

Sadly, at the time I would have thought this 360 met the REA standard.  It was administered every three years, administered by a separate headquarters unit dedicated to inspections and evaluations, and I was guaranteed anonymity (in writing, but my manager also supervised 14 employees - I guess I stood out).  The key in this was the external.  Even though it was administered by a supposedly independent unit reporting directly to the CEO-equivalent, it was composed of people who had performed the functions they were inspecting and, consequently, had a tight network with the people being inspected.

Another item of note, this happened when I was 21 and thought my opinion could change the world and, at the very least, unseat someone who had been in his position for 15 years and with the organization for 30.  Galactically naive and immature.

--Andy