Decision guidance: 360° evaluation interviews
Internal or external implementation
360° evaluation interviews are essential for the success of the method!
Not every 360° feedback leads to a positive change in terms of performance improvement. Unfortunately there are even negative developments to a certain percentage. Some studies speak of up to 30% of feedback recipients for whom 360° feedback has a negative effect. For some, critical feedback leads to frustration and a lack of willingness to deal constructively with the feedback (more on this in this blog post by Daniele D’Amore; in german language). Others simply lack ideas or the ability to adapt their own behaviour in such a way that something better can come out of the feedback.
A professionally conducted evaluation interview can help to correctly classify the results and avoid reactance effects. As a trained, neutral person, the coach can support the interpretation of the 360° results and, together with the feedback recipient, derive concrete, achievable development steps. It is recommended to record these steps in writing – in the best case directly in the online system.
A further advantage of the evaluation dialogue with a coach is that the 360° process gains in commitment and value. The additional costs incurred are usually justified by the obvious positive effects. In this way, the coach provides effective support in selecting the most relevant areas of development, setting sensible priorities and checking for feasibility. In this way it is avoided that a feedback recipient undertakes too many projects at once and concentrates primarily on areas where the chances of success for change are low. The coach thus helps to formulate achievable and realistic goals.
Another positive effect of working with a coach is that the feedback recipient feels valued by the company and is additionally motivated for his development process. Particularly in the case of critical feedback from the 360° report, the coach can also strengthen the feedback recipient and help him or her to take a constructive look at his or her strengths and weaknesses profile.
The following table (source: Holtmeier, S., Domsch, A., & Mrugalla, N., 2013; in german language) can serve as an aid in deciding whether the evaluation discussions would be better conducted with internal or external resources.
Decision guidance: 360° evaluation meetings – internal or external realization?
- internal coach
- Better acquainted with company situation/ knows background and history better
- Is visible on the organisation chart and thus hierarchically and structurally integrated, which has advantages and disadvantages
- Is part of the corporate culture and therefore has less risk of being rejected as a “foreign body
- Usually knows the internal relationship networks as well as options for action and can bring this expert knowledge into the conversation; more efficiency if necessary
- Wage earner; sometimes implies lower value
- Sustainability is easier to achieve if the employee remains in contact with the interlocutor for a longer period of time
- Often no specialist for the issue; tends to be more cautious
- Must deal with the suspicion of the “Hidden Agenda”; is sometimes “abused” in his role
- Rather with subject-related questions?
- external coach
- The external consultant often has to catch up on this knowledge; for this purpose he usually brings knowledge from other projects into the consulting relationship
- Can, on the whole, act more independently of role and status, but conversely cannot rely on them either
- Looks more impartially with a “fresh view” of the company; questions and takes little for granted
- Is less tempted to appear as an expert, often acts more as a process companion; often reaches the goal more easily through curious questions
- Biller; often perceived as a form of appreciation
- Sustainability must be secured in a different way; internal staff must assume more responsibility and can lean back less
- Often more experienced; usually more conflict-prone; more likely to put a finger in the wound
- Confidentiality of the discussion situation is more credible: more open discussions are more likely
- Rather with personality related questions?
More from our 360° feedback knowledge base
Article overview