Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

360 degree feedback, also known as 'multi-rater feedback', is the most comprehensive

appraisal where the feedback about the employees’ performance comes from all the sources that
come in contact with the employee on his job.

360 degree respondents for an employee can be his/her peers, managers (i.e. superior),
subordinates, team members, customers, suppliers/ vendors - anyone who comes into contact with
the employee and can provide valuable insights and information or feedbackregarding the "on-the-
job" performance of the employee.
360 degree appraisal has four integral components:

1. Self appraisal
2. Superior’s appraisal
3. Subordinate’s appraisal
4. Peer appraisal.

Self appraisal gives a chance to the employee to look at his/her strengths and weaknesses, his
achievements, and judge his own performance. Superior’s appraisal forms the traditional part of
the 360 degree performance appraisal where the employees’ responsibilities and actual
performance is rated by the superior.

Subordinates appraisal gives a chance to judge the employee on the parameters like communication
and motivating abilities, superior’s ability to delegate the work, leadership qualities etc. Also known
as internal customers, the correct feedback given by peers can help to find employees’ abilities to
work in a team, co-operation and sensitivity towards others.
Self assessment is an indispensable part of 360 degree appraisals and therefore 360
degreePerformance appraisal have high employee involvement and also have the strongest impact
on behavior and performance. It provides a "360-degree review" of the employees’ performance
and is considered to be one of the most credible performance appraisal methods.

360 degree performance appraisal is also a powerful developmental tool because when
conducted at regular intervals (say yearly) it helps to keep a track of the changes others’
perceptions about the employees. A 360 degree appraisal is generally found more suitable for the
managers as it helps to assess their leadership and managing styles. This technique is being
effectively used across the globe for performance appraisals. Some of the organizations following it
are Wipro, Infosys, and Reliance Industries etc.

Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) are scales used to rate performance. BARS are
normally presented vertically with scale points ranging from five to nine. It is an appraisal method
that aims to combine the benefits of narratives, critical incidents, and quantified ratings by
anchoring a quantified scale with specific narrative examples of good, moderate, and poor
performance. [1]
BARS were developed in response to dissatisfaction with the subjectivity involved in using
traditional ratings scales such as the graphic rating scale[2] A reviews of BARS concluded that the
strength of this rating format may lie primarily in the performance dimensions which are gathered
rather than the distinction between behavioral and numerical scale anchors. [3]
Benefits of BARS
BARS are rating scales that add behavioral scale anchors to traditional rating scales (e.g. graphic
rating scales). In comparison to other rating scales, BARS are intended to facilitate more accurate
ratings of the target person's behavior or performance. However, whereas the BARS is often
regarded as a superior performance appraisal method, BARS may still suffer
from unreliability, leniency bias and lack of discriminant validity between performance
dimensions[4][5]

Developing BARS
BARS can be developed using data collected through the critical incident technique[6], or through
the use of comprehensive data about the tasks performed by a job incumbent, such as might be
collected through a task analysis. In order to construct BARS several basic steps, outlined below,
are followed.

1. Examples of effective and ineffective behavior related to job are collected from
people with knowledge of job using the critical incident technique. Alternatively, data may
be collected through the careful examination of data from a recent task analysis.
2. These data are then converted in to performance dimensions. To convert these
data into performance dimensions, examples of behavior (such as critical incidents) are
sorted into homogeneous groups using the Q-sort technique. Definitions for each group
of behaviors are then written to define each grouping of behaviors as a performance
dimension
3. A group of subject matter experts (SMEs) are asked to retranslate the behavioral
examples back into their respective performance dimensions. At this stage the behaviors
for which there is not a high level of agreement (often 50%- 75%) are discarded while the
behaviors which were retranslated back into their resepctive performance dimensions
with a high level of SME agreement are retained. The retranslation process helps to
ensure that behaviors are readily identifiable with their respective performance
dimensions.
4. The retained behaviors are then scaled by having SMEs rate the effectiveness of
each behavior. These ratings are usually done on a 5 to 9 point Likert-type scale.
5. Behaviors with a low standard deviation (for examples, less than 1.50) are
retained while behaviors with a higher standard deviation are discarded. This step helps
to ensure SME agreement about the rating of each behavior.
6. Finally, behaviors for each performance dimensions- all meeting retranslation
and criteria will be used as scale anchors.