360° feedback: Accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness.

Abstract

This study examined how 360 degree feedback ratings and self-other rating discrepancies related to reactions to feedback, perceptions of feedback accuracy, perceived usefulness of the feedback, and recipients' receptivity to development. The results indicated that less favorable ratings were related to beliefs that feedback was less accurate and to negative reactions. Negative reactions and perceptions that feedback was less accurate were related to beliefs that the feedback was less useful. Those who found feedback less useful were perceived by a facilitator as less development-focused. Goal orientation did not moderate the relationship between ratings and perceptions of accuracy or reactions to feedback. Goal orientation was related to perceptions of usefulness of the process several weeks after receipt of feedback. The results question widely held assumptions about 360 degree feedback that negative and discrepant feedback motivates positive change.

Self–other agreement in empowering leadership: Relationships with leader effectiveness and subordinates' job satisfaction and turnover intention

“…In an upward feedback field experiment study, Atwater, Waldman, Atwater, and Cartier (2000) reported that leaders who received lower ratings from their subordinates reduced their commitment to them after receiving the feedback. Likewise, Brett and Atwater (2001) reported that lower ratings received by over-estimators resulted in negative reactions such as anger and discouragement. Overestimation on the part of leaders may therefore affect subordinates' job satisfaction negatively and turnover intention positively.…”

360‐degree feedback with systematic coaching: Empirical analysis suggests a winning combination

“…To date, the general consensus from research and practice has been that there are both benefits and potential problems associated with 360s, especially if used as an evaluation system rather than just as a personal development technique (Brett & Atwater, 2001). DeNisi and Griffin (2001) summarize the major advantages: (1) they provide ratees with information on how they are perceived by others; (2) they provide more information for improvement (by addressing weaknesses) than any other technique; and (3) ratings and feedback from different groups with special insights can be obtained.…”

Reactions to skill assessment: The forgotten factor in explaining motivation to learn

“…In particular, positive feedback enhances individuals' perceptions of their response capability, which may bolster individuals' perceptions of the usefulness of the feedback (Martocchio & Webster, 1992). Brett and Atwater (2001), for example, found that lower 360 o feedback ratings from others (i.e., boss, peers) generated more negative reactions (i.e., angry, Reactions to Assessment 13 confused, discouraged), which in turn detrimentally impacted the perceived usefulness of the feedback. Based on this evidence, we predict that trainees who perform better on the pretraining assessment will have more positive utility perceptions.…”

“…It is often the case, however, that skill assessments are only loosely tied to specific developmental opportunities. A good example is multi-source feedback systems, which are frequently used to highlight individuals' weaknesses and developmental needs with the goal of stimulating self-directed learning and development (Brett & Atwater, 2001;Smither, London, Flautt, Vargas, & Kucine, 2003). In these situations, an important issue concerns the extent to which the assessment process motivates individuals to seek out development opportunities.…”

“…However, they focused on the effect of overall assessment reactions and did not examine the implications of specific reaction dimensions. Brett and Atwater (2001) conducted a study to examine individuals' reactions to feedback designed for developmental purposes (360 o feedback). They proposed that "… individuals who find the feedback more useful will express motivation to change and focus on development …" (p. 933).…”