Having worked with Bowland and a number of other 360 tools over the last few years, my aim here is to share some lessons learnt and gain views from others.  As a bit of background, I work as a people development consultant with professional services and public sector clients.  In my former career, I was Head of Learning and Development for a 'top five' Built Asset Consultancy that employed over 3000 people internationally.   So, here are the five top lessons I've learnt over the years. 

1.  Understand the context

Working as a consultant, often a 360 degree feedback process forms part of the client's desire to change and develop their people as part of a leadership programme, is part of a performance appraisal process, or is an external manifestation of a desire to develop a coaching culture where 'open and honest feedback' becomes the norm.   If a client has experience of the 360 process or is an HR/L&D expert then this is often the case - i.e. you immediately understand the context in which you are approaching the process.

In my experience, however, many clients will launch into a 360 solution before really understanding the issue they wish to address, or an understanding of the process.   I've had calls which simply say 'Sue, John needs a 360 report, he's got the self-awareness of a bull in a china shop and has no idea.  I need evidence.  Can you send him a link to a 360 thing so we can sort it out?".   The short answer is "no".  The long answer is "why?"

My view is that to really get the most from a 360 tool, you need to ask the right questions of the organisation upfront to understand what they want to achieve - both at an organisation level and for the individual.  Only once you know this, all the planning, the communication and the design process can begin.

2.   Select the right tool for the job

Only once I know what the client wants to achieve can I select the right tool.  Countless times I've had clients (SME's and large organisations) ask me to "create something quickly" or not appreciate the amount of preparation, positioning and communication that needs to sit around a 360 tool for the process to be successful.  For very small audiences, this might include being asked to use Word or Excel to get feedback and co-ordinate it all via e-mail, or using a tool like Survey Monkey. 

I have personally received feedback using processes like this and whilst the feedback itself was useful, I can be sure the time it took the administrator to co-ordinate the process and produce a half-decent report was money ill-spent. 

Just because you are already paying an administrator a salary, don't think that it's time well spent to create a cheap 360 process in house using Excel/Word/E-Mail etc. and that the cost of using a proper 360 feedback tool is wasted - think of the quality of the output, the ease of the process and the benefits of letting a tool and an expert manage the process, so you can focus on the results.  Pay the money and let the tool manage the process.

3.  Position the process and manage expectations.

Depending on the context of the 360 process, you need to design a communications strategy to manage the expectations of those being rated and the respondents.  This will be different depending on the circumstances and might include meeting with line managers to gain their support, ensuring those being rated (and those doing the rating) know why, what and how the data will be used. 

I quite like the model of having a senior group of people going through the process before their team members, so that they can extol the virtues of the 360 feedback process to them and gain trust in the process.  This also means that those being rated may have also just rated their line manager.

Depending on the organisation's culture and purpose of the process, I might also suggest that the 360 feedback is kept entirely confidential - i.e. the results are only seen by the external consultants (me and my team) and the individual who has been rated.   Although I cannot categorically prove this alters the results and drives more honesty, I have seen it create trust in the process where there may otherwise have been scepticism.  Often the client sponsor may only receive a summary of trends and results.

4.  Keep focused on the outcome

This is something that I think is often lost on a 360 project.  Yes, you will want to align any questions and tools with your own organisational competencies.  Yes, you might want to brand your 360 feedback process to make it your own.  And yes, you might need to get sign off on all communications from your Board to ensure they align with your business strategy and goals. 

But remember, the purpose of the process is (probably) to give individual's feedback on their performance, to develop their skills in certain areas and build their self-awareness.  So, whilst I completely understand that anything you do needs to align with your people strategy, when designing a 360 don't lose sight ot the outcome and then react accordingly. 
A client once said to me, "Sue, we can't issue the 360 until our leadership competency framework is complete and that's not being signed off for nine months".   My response was to understand the context of the 360 (in this case a leadership programme affecting a small proportion of the employees) and to ask the client what generic leadership competencies he thought the business might want to measure (Bowland has a 'vanilla 360' which lists out the common one's which is useful).  And then we were off - giving feedback to individual's in the programme within weeks, not months.  As I've said, focus on the outcome for the individual and the organisation and make a decision accordingly.

5.  Manage the individual's receiving the feedback.

I know from the recent Bowland talk I attended that Brendan is passionate about giving the feedback report to the individual in the feedback session and not before.  Having done this both ways, one big lesson learnt is to wholeheartedly agree.   However innocous you may view the comments in a report, the recipient may read it differently, given their perception of their environment. 

You can easily end up with a defensive individual in the session on a witch hunt to find the person who says they 'always do X' when they think they only 'sometimes' do it - and this rather detracts from the process.   Likewise, you have no idea of the emotional state of the individual if you send them the report 'cold'.

And finally.. 

As a consultant I would always recommend repeating the process regularly (6-12 months), integrating it with others business processes and using it as a benchmark of performance improvement.  In my mind 360s are a great way for an L&D or HR Leader to address the 'return on investment issue' of any project without having to covert the result into hard cash, which is often a tricky one to prove. 

A conversation which runs "50% of our people thought our line managers were poor in leadership skills a year ago, but now 85% of them think they are strong, and this is down to our leadership programme/coaching development/investment in X" is music to my ears.

Sue Miles is Director at Chaseville Consulting Ltd and works alongside clients as their extended arm to design and deliver people development projects.
www.chaseville.co.uk

This post is provided by Linda Doe, following an exchange of emails where we disagreed on when to hand over the feedback report.  My comment on the post will follow!  Many thanks to Linda for providing the following:

"A question I am asked often is: but when do we show the person their 360 feedback results? Before they have their feedback session? Or wait until they get there? There is no one answer to this, it's a question of judgement. But generally, I advise that reports should be given to individuals about a week in advance fo their feedback session, providing of course that the 360 views are non-attributable to the individuals who have contributed.

Why? - several reasons. Because there should be no harsh surprises with appraisal data: if managers and apprasiers are on-the-ball, any serious relationship or management issues should be dealt with in a timely fashion, on an ongoing basis, not left until yearly appraisal.

Often the fear of upsetting or difficult responses is greater than the reality: in my experince of helping companies with appraisal, more often than not, responses to 360 are helpful, constructive and - and here is the important bit - need time to sink in for the individual to appreciate their impact and to prepare and engage in discussion about them. Further, appraisal at its most effectrive should not be a top-down, management-led tool: individuals need to be highly engaged in its process and buy-in is essential. How can someone prepare for their appraisal session, contribute meaningfully, when they are seeing the results for the first time at the session? The apprasier has not only the unfair advantage, but this also sets up a "teacher knows best" scenario.

My advice would be to place appraisal carefully in the culture of the organisation, so that no nasty surprises emerge...and if on those rare occasions that they do, make sure the data is sent to the individual accompanied by a telephone call or note of reassurnace that "everything will be discussed fully when we meet". If you are really worried, then last resort is to show the responses at appraisal interview - with an explanation of why.

On balance, its better, in my professional view, to risk the odd sensitive set of responses being misunderstood, than to perpetuate the "manager knows best" top-down approach. That said - if your organisation has avoided difficult and sensitive issues - watch out! - they will certainly emerge with a good, confidential, 360 tool and process.

From, Linda Doe, Chartered Business Psychologist, www.psychatwork.co.uk

With our eye firmly on how 360 degree feedback precipitates changed behaviours, the following article is a great insight into the neuroscience of change.

We are delighted to have our guest contributor, Lilliana Gibbs of Enthum Coaching, provide a very interesting article that illuminates how coaching and 360 degree feedback effectively support an individual to affect lasting change.

Ah Ha Moments, and how to have more of them

Changing behaviour within organisations is much more difficult that we like to think it is. Now thanks to the integration of psychology and neuroscience, we can see how the physiological nature of the brain predisposes people to resist some forms of leadership, and accept others.

 

The Neuroscience of Leadership by David Rock and Jeffrey Schwartz http://www.strategy-business.com/press/article/06207 describes why persuasion doesn’t really work, and that despite the evidence of its ineffectiveness, the ‘carrot and stick’ approach remains as popular as ever. What has been discovered is that change is pain; it genuinely provokes discomfort and zaps our energy.

Our brains have developed a useful capacity to detect ‘errors’, those perceived differences between expectations and actuality. At the traffic lights we expect a green/orange/red sequence. So familiar, it requires minimal brain power. However, if the sequence skips orange, it jars with our expectation, and shows up on an MRI scan as increased activity in our amygdala or ‘old brain’, a spot closely connected to our fear circuitry. When activated, the amygdala draws metabolic energy away from the prefrontal lobe where our higher intellectual functioning is generated. This means that the unfamiliar and the new not only increase our discomfort and stress, but also decrease logical or higher thinking.

So what is the right way to go about facilitating organisational change?

The answer is to spend quality time and attention on new ideas, and sustain reminders and reinforcement until the mental circuitry changes, and the ideas are adopted.

The authors describe how the act of paying attention creates physical changes in the brain, and how our expectations shape reality. Repeated, purposeful and focussed attention can lead to self-awareness and ‘long lasting personal evolution’ or change.

The first step is to get people’s undivided attention. The brain’s prefrontal cortex requires concentration to process new information, so removing everyday routines to focus on something —such as an off-site workshop —provides an ideal environment. Once leaders have achieved attention, give people the big picture, the broad vision. Scientists are finding that our expectations and attitudes —our mental maps— actually define our experience. When allowed to focus, and given a vision, our brains are encouraged to contribute —to imagine opportunities and solutions. We are inspired to co-create the picture –—conditions ripe for moments of insight.

Brain scans show sudden bursts of high-frequency gamma waves just prior to moments of new understanding. This suggests a complex set of new connections is being created in the brain. With it comes a rush of adrenaline like neurotransmitters, providing a turbo charged feel-good energy. These ‘moments of insight’ are powerful motivators that counter resistance, and propel change.

One of the most effective ways of increasing these moments of insight is through one-on-one coaching that supports people to find their own answers and encourages self-awareness. Most people find it hard to hold onto new learning, and one study found that training alone increased productivity by 28%, but when follow-up coaching was added to the mix, increased productivity went up to 88%.

Positive feedback when managed skilfully is also a powerful reinforcer of behaviour, and a well-designed 360-feedback process is an effective tool for encouraging self-awareness. The brain recognises positive strokes as a reason to ‘do more of something’, and the act of focusing attention, supports an individual’s efforts on specific developmental issues.

Clearly, the more we learn about the phenomenon of change, the more effectively we can manage it and benefit, both personally and organisationally.

Lilliana Gibbs is a director of Enthum Coaching www.enthum.com

“I’ve only got 45 minutes, so can we get straight to the point?” said Charles, the head of corporate law as he strode into the room. The “point” to which he was referring was our meeting to go through his 360 feedback. The “point” that he actually wanted to make was that he didn’t really want to hear the views of others.

Coaching this high achieving City law firm partner had proved challenging for the last 4 months. Asked by the firm’s Managing partner if I “could help to sort him out”, I had struggled to engage in a change process. Charles was admired by the firm for his talent in winning millions of pounds of fees with new clients. But there had been staff losses and dissension in Charles’s department. Charles had apparently to change his style.

It was clear from the outset of our coaching sessions that Charles had no real intention of changing. My observations were brushed aside. He told me that his colleagues would have to “take him as they found him”. Charles demonstrated all the traits of the ultra alpha male with a few of the more extreme lawyer’s attributes thrown in – highly analytic, intimidating, quick witted, highly (superficially) confident, impatient, opinionated and focusing on flaws in other people and their views.

What’s more, Charles typically didn’t like exploring emotions - “I don’t do emotion –emotions can’t be controlled!”. Yet it was clear that Charles was actually highly emotional in frequently talking about his anger, frustration and - in his very occasional weaker moments – his insecurity.

Charles was eventually persuaded to agree to a 360 feedback session. In typical fashion, he was immediately dismissive of any negative comments. He also spent the first five minutes trying to work out who had been less than glowing in their opinions of him. Here, however was feedback that Charles could not ignore. Here was written data with examples of his behaviour being repeated across his department. There were well argued remarks backed up with facts.- a benefit of 360 work with lawyers is that their written comments are clear and supported by strong evidence.

Gradually, Charles’ curiosity in the feedback was engaged. He began to understand that the strengths that he thought were so important were damaging to his colleagues (and to himself). A common comment was that Charles was a very poor listener – to the extent that many in his department had stopped talking to him - “Charles only listens to respond”, ”I’ve stopped talking to Charles – I am not important enough fro him “ “Charles is only interested in his own clients”.

For the first time in 5 meetings, Charles’ defences were lowered. I turned the screw (a bit). This was an opportunity that might not come again! I suggested a FIRO assessment ( more data/evidence) to help Charles understand his needs for control (high) and openness (low).

Charles thought that he should acknowledge the feedback at his next departmental meeting. “Do you think that is enough?” I asked Charles. “On reflection – no. I will make more time for people. I will tell people that I appreciate them “.

We’ll both see what happens. Will Charles revert to type?  The first signs are promising but one 360 appraisal does not lead to a complete personality change. One thing is clear - without a structured approach, Charles would probably never have started to “listen” to his co-workers. Appealing to his curiosity about data was crucial to any breakthrough. Charles may even admit to having emotions soon!

This is a guest post for Bowland Solutions by Nigel McEwen.  Formally a managing partner of a top 100 law firm, Nigel is now an executive coach who works with clients in the accountancy, legal, manufacturing and financial services sectors.  To contact Nigel, please add a comment to this post.