As an employee, appraisal, it seems, is both inevitable and universal. But without a carefully structured system of appraisal, managers will judge the work performance of their subordinates informally and arbitrarily. The human inclination for judging can create serious motivational, ethical, and legal problems in the workplace. Without a structured appraisal system, there is little chance of ensuring the judgments made will be lawful, fair, defensible, and accurate.

Performance appraisals are a common tool to measures employee progress in a job. These formal, structured systems for measuring, evaluating, and improving an employee’s job-related behaviors and output are typically conducted yearly, usually on the employee’s anniversary date or during the end of the fiscal year. Because the results of the performance appraisal have a direct implication with salary adjustments and because they depend on the appraiser’s perception of the employee, these valuation tools are often difficult for the appraiser and stressful for the employee.

In the latest modification to appraisals, 360 degree appraisal, attempts to improve conventional appraisal systems by involving peers, subordinates, and even customers as raters of an individual’s performance. Three-hundred and sixty-degree feedback, also called multilayer or outsourced feedback, is simply receiving feedback from others with whom good working relationships are key to a participant’s effectiveness.

Not only does this process identify areas for improvement and development, but also serves to reinforce and affirm an individual’s strengths. Many participants report the feedback they receive from a 360-degree process far exceeds the quality and depth of feedback they would receive through ordinary means from a sole rater in their organizations.

The major problem with the 360-degree evaluations is the issue of trust. A 360-degree program is doomed to fail if prospective participants and raters do not trust the organizations’ intentions in offering (or requiring) their participation. Participants are likely to resist involvement if they fear the feedback will be used to punish them instead of improve their performance. Therefore, before embarking on a 360-degree feedback process, an organization must set ground rules and policies for the appraisal and educate employees how the results will be used to improve their performance.

Since the ultimate purpose of the 360-degree feedback is to improve job performance, behaviors measured must be linked to overall strategic goals. The strategic goals may be either broad, organization-wide goals or narrow goals for a given department. Companies using the 360 degree agree this system gives workers a more accurate sense of personal strengths and weaknesses, which in turn boosts productivity. In some companies, employees can’t be promoted without a satisfactory rating from their peers and subordinates. If employees agree the supervisor needs additional help in teamwork or communications, for example, a plan to improve these skills will be developed for the coming year and the supervisor’s performance will be assessed the following year. Only if the teamwork or communications have improved, will the supervisor move up the organizational hierarchy.

Organizations successfully implementing the 360 degree appraisal system report improved satisfaction with the process and improved performance of those being evaluated. It also helps employees plan for upward mobility within the organization. Learn more about performance appraisals in our Human Resources class at Dalton State College.