Case in Point

Read on ...................................

Case in Point

Around The 360 Loop

- Rukmini Iyer
A different perspective

In our case study section this

time, we look at a hypothetical case
in a slightly different perspective.
The normal aim of case studies is to
analyze a problem and find a
solution. In this case, we use a
problem to understand a concept
and to learn to think out of the box.
We will see how the tool of 360degree feedback can be used in
customised, unconventional ways to
derive maximum benefit out of it.

360-degree feedback - The Basics:

50

360-degree feedback is the

process in which an employee
evaluates himself on a set of criteria;
his manager evaluates him, as do his
peers and direct reports. The
employee receives a gap analysis
between how he perceives himself
and how others perceive him.
Effective 360-degree feedback
processes also include development
planning and coaching sessions.
360-degree feedback is said to be
advantageous in the following areas:
To the individual:
4 Perception is reality and this
process helps individuals to
understand how others perceive
them. Feedback is essential for
learning.
4 Development
needs
are
revealed.
4 Individuals can better manage
their own performance and
careers.
To the team:
4 Increases
communication
between team members.
4 Supports teamwork by involving
team
members
in
the
Advanc'edge MBA / June 2003

development process.
To the organisation:
4 Better career development for
employees.
4 Improves customer service by
having customers contribute to
evaluation.
4 Drives training.

A case in point:
Ravi had been one of the
exceptional regional managers at
Xen India, a multinational company.
However, his performance this year
was abysmal. His impeccable track
record took a beating owing to
personal problems. His boss the
country head of Xen India and the

CEO of the company were clear that

Ravi had to be fired. But Sharon, the
HR Head of the company, was not
willing to let him go. Sharon spoke
to Ravi about his problems and also
to his boss and the CEO as well, both
of who maintained that although
they sympathise with Ravis
problems, good management is all
about performing well under
pressure and therefore, if Ravi could
not handle the strain, he had to go.
To make things worse, Ravis
360-degree appraisal had at all
levels, diagnosed him as lacking
commitment, being inattentive and
lacking team spirit. This was rather
surprising, considering his good

record as far as meeting his targets

w a s c o n c e r n e d . Sharon was
convinced that sacking Ravi was not
a humane approach and that HR had
to take the initiative to find out what
was wrong with their processes,
which had prevented the problem
from coming to the fore earlier.

Problem areas:

To address her dilemma, Sharon

spoke to her friend Jai, who was the
HR Head at a big Indian company.
Jai heard out the case and
understood that Ravi had been
under tremendous pressure because
of problems in his family life. His
sisters marriage had fallen apart
and she was staying with him along
with her kids. This, coupled with the
social pressures and tension among
relatives, had a bearing on his work
performance. Sharon also felt that
although Ravi had personal
problems, he was trying to escape
the situation by being grossly
preoccupied with excelling at work.
This had taken away his ability to
respond to the demands of his home
life. The failure syndrome flowed
into his workplace and despite the
fact that he was trying desperately
he failed to do well or earn rewards
at work. She worried that their
appraisal system was not working as
well as it should.
Jai comprehended the problem
with the processes at Xen India and
realised that the bottleneck was the
360-degree appraisal, which was
impeding growth instead of
promoting it. This was because
conventional approach left little to
the imagination was not democratic
and was much feared. He compared
the process with that in his own
company, helping Sharon realise
what was lacking at Xen India.

Comparison:

Jai explained that the 360-degree

feedback tool is essentially used as

Case in Point

Case in Point

a process for opening up the

organisation. It is a way of
encouraging managers and leaders
to listen to other stakeholders in
their organisational role: the boss,
peers or subordinates and
customers. The real learning
happens when they look at the
degree of convergence or variance
between self-perception and that of
others, and the degree of
convergence or variance with others
in their peer group. The critical
success factor lies in how it is
implemented and what the results
are used for.
Hence, the appraisal system at
Jais company was built around two
assumptions:
i) to
retain
the
existing
humaneness and
ii) to accept that a managers
personal life is a germane part of
his personality and total life.
So, any managers appraisal must
consider the gains and losses in his
personal life too. Not with an
intention to judge, but to push the
drivers that lend impetus to his
organisational performance. Thus,
among the various parameters on
which managers were assessed for
leadership competency, a critical
parameter was the ability to balance
work and family life.
At Jais company, although the
managers were evaluated by their
subordinates, peers and seniors, as
in the conventional 360-degree
appraisal system, the manager could
choose his subordinates and peers
who would assess him. Secondly,
the evaluated questionnaire went
to a central agency appointed
overseas, for evaluation, not to HR.
Thirdly, the final scores were sent
directly by the agency to the
evaluated manager, again, not to
HR. The HR Head simply received
an intimation that the copies had
been sent to the manager.
From the report, it was not

possible for the manager to glean

what the peers and subordinates had
said, for it gave a mechanical score
based on the parameters stipulated.
Only the certified facilitators or the
agency itself could decode the data
and interpret it. The process per se
was very unthreatening, because
once the report went to the manager,
he could decide whether he wanted
an interpretation or not. The HR
head didnt need it, since it was
meant for the manager, for his
specific application.
If managers chose to request for
a facilitator, who was trained to
interpret the scores, a second copy
of the report was given to the
facilitator from the central agency.
In coordination with the facilitator,
the manager could divulge
information and insights on his own
self and then prepare a development
plan that would be integrated into
his work plan.

Revelations:

Sharon realised the lacunae in the

appraisal system at Xen India. She
also remembered Ravi telling her
that although he was not bothered
about the truth or falsity of what his
peers or subordinates said about
him, the process by itself was
threatening. Since peers tended to be
judgmental, their opinions could be
demeaning.
On the other hand, the process at
Jais company ensured a more
democratic approach where the
manager was responsible for his
own growth. It recognised the fact
that an organisation can at best
provide the tools and the
environment to enable the
individual to help himself but it is
the manager who needs to take
ownership to effectively utilise these
tools.
The process could be adopted
successfully if care was taken in the
following areas:

Read on ...................................

4 Managers should select their

evaluators objectively, with their
overall growth in mind, rather
than aiming at simply a good
review for the time being.
4 All employees should be briefed
about the importance of their
role as evaluators in contributing
to each others and ultimately the
organisations growth by
assessing
sincerely
and
seriously.
If these points were controlled,
the 360-degree appraisal would
work well not only to bring
perceptive gaps to the fore, but also
to actually throw light on potential
areas that could evolve into a serious
problems in the future. Sharon
realised that processes like these,
which instilled pro-activity and a
genuine feedback loop, could help
avoid a situation like the one
involving Ravi. She could lend true
meaning to the 360-degree appraisal
by making it more complete and
valuable.
The revelation also helped Sharon
to decide the course of action as far
as Ravi was concerned. She could
encourage him to own up his
performance issues and ensure that
enough communication takes place
at sustained time-frames with his
peers and subordinates to seek
resolution and assistance and not let
him go completely down under. At
the same time, from the
organisations point of view, she
would have to evaluate the costs of
Ravis non-performance and the
probable replacement versus
providing the company tools to
improve performance and the
resultant benefits in terms of money,
time, organisational stress and
energy. If she could propose and
successfully implement a more
holistic approach to performance
appraisal, she realised she would
succeed in her role as the
HR Head.
Advanc'edge MBA / June 2003

51