!!When the analysis gets in the way of the development!!

Today we will consider the pros and cons of corporate statistical analysis.  The requirement for management and company executives to measure the rate of return and value from any investment is enshrined in good corporate practice.

360 Feedback is an excellent personal development tool.  However, as with any tool, it can be used to great effect or it can inflict great damage.  We have covered many of the issues in terms of creating the groundwork, managing  communication, awareness of personal sensitivities and ensuring continuity of development in previous newsletters.  It is not perfect, and needs to be used sensibly and sensitively by both the individual receiving the feedback and the organisation that pays for and supports the  process.  In this article we would like to cover data analysis and reporting from the organisation’s needs and how they are often addressed in the real world

Objectives and goals for the organisation

Measuring and monitoring progress    

Justifying Return on Investment (ROI)

Most organisations place 360 Feedback into one or more of the following categories;

• Individual Personal Development Tool

• Career coaching/mentoring programme

• Pay, reward and promotion indicator

• Global HR improvement programme

The structure, degree of integration, resource, monitoring and reporting requirements vary greatly between the different categories.  Very often 360 Feedback is initiated as a tool for personal development and improved organisational training effectiveness.  In many companies it remains as a very effective tool at both a personal and cost effective level.  Some organisations offer 360 Feedback to senior management as a platform to launch and support individual coaching and mentoring programmes.    Again this normally works very well. for both the  individual and the organisation.  In both these cases the 360 Feedback process can stand alone from other business systems and the level of analysis/reporting beyond that of the individual is relatively simple, without any need to integrate the data into HR or MIS/EMS systems within the business.

Once the requirement from the system moves beyond that of  personal development/coaching then the relative complexity, need for structural integrity and process rigour increase dramatically.  The main reasons for this increase can be laid simply upon the fact that significant decisions will  be made about individuals/and groups in comparison to other individuals and groups, and the rigour required to ensure the validity, accessibility and useability of the underlying data increases almost exponentially.

Organisations that have not considered the ramifications involved at the start of the process, find that changing the use of 360 from one category to another can be a slow, painful and expensive process. Occasionally organisations can discover that the process is actually not possible without starting from scratch with another system, and paying for the manual transfer of data from the old system to the new system..

Issues to consider; 

How are the data points and relationships held in the system

What interface mechanisms are their to transfer data to current back office systems.

Are there any costs involved in implementing data exchange between systems.

What report generating capability is there with the current system.

What kind of organisational reports is the organisation likely to require..

Who in the organisation will need to receive which type of report

Are there any confidentiality issues for different report types that will need to be addressed

We firmly believe that in terms of individual feedback that "less is more".  In general, the simpler the level of presentation to an individual, the greater the acceptance, learning and opportunity for personal development.

At the organisational level we would suggest that almost the opposite is true, particularly if the 360 is used in one of the more sophisticated categories that we referred to earlier.

To understand and position progress the following minimum level of data is normally required;

• Range

• Distribultion

• Percentile ranking

and when considering individual or team performance in terms of pay, reward or career progression, then other data sets should be considered;

Relative distribution of scoring by feedback group class (managers, colleagues, reports, customers etc;)

Relative position/change in position against the overall distribution of scores as well as departmental class distribution.

One of the BIGGEST mistakes made by organisations using 360 as a performance/pay related tool is to consider actual position/score without reference to the shape and size of the total distribution.  Although the general shape of the distribution curve may well follow basic normative/Gaussian principles (a few at the edges, more at the sides, and most in the middle), the standard deviation (width) of the curve is often very small.

What does this mean?

It means that unless organisations are aware of, and understand the impact of investments, promotion and reward on people/groups/teams being separated by very small differences in results, that expected gains may never materialise. 

The need to measure and manage ROI is a fundamental and driving requirement of any corporation.  There is no reason whatsoever why this should not be applied to 360 Feedback (or any other HR resource).  However as with any form of measurement care needs to be taken to ensure that the metrics used are valid, appropriate and truly reflect the key value criteria for the investment under scrutiny.

360 Feedback is not a "quick fix" in terms of investment, quite simply because it relies on investment in resources and staff to improve/modify observable behaviour over a period of time.  There are undoubtedly some "quickish" returns from 360 investment, most of which are not easy to quantify objectively (personal awareness, individual and group moral, "customer" satisfaction) and some which might be (individual/departmental productivity, "customer" complaints, staff retention).  In most organisations however it is most probably impossible to justify these purely down to the implementation of 360 Feedback (unless of course this is the ONLY initiative in the company!!)

Suggestions to measure ROI for 360 Feedback

• Correlation of divisional/departmental competence improvements with corporate kpi improvement

• Use corporate/HR level competence analysis to influence training/development budget

• Compare training/development effectiveness before and after 360 implementation

The topics for the next three months include;

May	Making 360 Feedback work for you
June	The Cardinal Sins of 360 Feedback
July	360 Statistics and damned lies

• Topics of real interest to 360 Feedback users.
• Hear how 360 is being used in other companies
• Learn the benefits and pitfalls from others' experiences
• Interact and gain experience from other 360 users.
• Effective and enjoyable learning
• Bite size chunks of time
• No travel cost or time lost

We look forward to seeing you sometime soon.

It won't be the same without you!!