Performance Appraisals

Performance Appraisals This analysis will provide an overview of the 360-degree performance appraisal. A 360-degree feedback system is also known by a number of other names such as a multi-rater feedback, multisource feedback, or multisource assessment. This model of a performance appraisal involves gathering performance feedback form a number of different sources including supervisors, employees, customers, and peers to name a few. However, this model is flexible and virtually anyone who works with anyone else can provide a performance appraisal.

This paper will discuss some of the advantages and disadvantages of the 360-degree feedback system. If administered properly and implemented in the right setting, this model can provide an effective tool that can help organizational members advance their careers. Performance Appraisals Performance appraisals are an important tool in any organization. The effective use of different evaluation program has actually been shown to be able to reduce stress and an employee's reduce their intentions to quit and turnover rate (Avey, Luthans, & Jensen, 2009).

However, traditional evaluations were processed in a top-down fashion which was simply a supervisor who shared their perceptions of performance to the employees that they supervise. The top down eventually became more formalized however it has been shown to be ineffective in many cases. Since it is based on subjective and sometimes biased opinions from one individual, then these performance evaluations are prone to be inaccurate.

Furthermore, in many cases the supervisor does not actually spend much time working with their employees in a direct fashion and therefore is they are often unfamiliar with the employees performance in the first place. Since the problems associated with the top-down and traditional models of performance evaluations have become more obvious, many people have worked to begin developing alternative evaluation systems. One such system that is relatively new to the field is referred to as 360-degree evaluations.

The feedback that is given to the employee in such a system is far more comprehensive and includes more of a perspective than what is that the traditional model alone. The employee will generally receive the same top-down information from their supervisors; however, in addition they also receive evaluations from their peers as wells or even customers in some cases. Therefore it adds the bottom-up perspective as well as a side-to-side perspective on the individual's performance. Another development within this system also includes a self-evaluation.

The basic idea is that if you could information from all angles and a pattern emerges then this information would likely be more reliable as well as more relevant. The concept can be thought of as a circle of feedback from those around you and hence the term "360-degree" was given to it. Peer Input Peer-to-peer or co-worker performance evaluations are conducted by employees who work at the same level. Gaining feedback to those on the same level has proven to be a common sense approach to performance evaluations.

This is primarily due to the fact that people who work on the same level generally spend the most time working together and working together in similar ways. Thus when appraisals are given from this level it can significantly enhance the reliability of an evaluation system. A supervisor may limited amounts of interaction with their subordinates on a daily basis and even when they do this interaction may not be task related. However, usually members of the same group interact on more of a continual basis.

Therefore since this group is often more familiar with the actual working habits and styles of their peer team then they are thought to be more qualified to provide meaningful insights that can be used led the team towards the fulfillment of organizational goals (Muniute-Cobb & Alfred, 2010). There are to different ways that a 360-degree evaluation system can influence peer performance that were identified.

The first is that when employees simply know that they are being evaluated by their peer group then increases the chances that they will be more engaged in group activities and participate fully in the tasks at hand (Wiley & Gardner, 2009). If you know that you are being evaluated on your performance at all times then this provides a strong incentive for you put your best foot forth. However, in some cases this can actually be counterproductive.

Some employees might feel an increased amount of stress or anxiety from being constantly evaluated and actually perform worse than they would have otherwise. The way that a peer evaluation is conducted is another factor that can serve to make or break the effort. The peer portion of a 360 degree feedback, used in an effective manner, can work to improve the self-awareness of all the individuals in the group.

Furthermore, if patterns emerge in the group's response to an individual's performance, then this can add a significant amount of credibility to the evaluation. For example, if your boss and you were not on the best terms and they gave a poor performance evaluation then you might suspect personal bias. However, if you received similar feedback from an evaluation by your supervisor, your peers, as well as the customers or clients then this information would be much more difficult to dismiss.

Therefore, by adding different dimensions to the performance appraisal you can significantly improve its credibility. Conclusion An effective evaluation process can be a valuable tool in regards to attraction, retention, and motivation (Becker, Antuar, & Everett, 2011). For the most part, employees who are actively engaged in their career development are for the most part continually trying to develop their careers on their own behalf. Therefore, receiving timely and relevant feedback can often help to promote the employees in their own personal ambitions.

In a 360 peer review, since the feedback comes from various perspectives,.