Question

Instead of using the supervisor as the sole determinant of your performance rating, you could get information from a variety of sources including subordinates, peers, customers, top managers, and yourself. The result will be a less biased and more complete evaluation. So why isn’t 360 degree feedback more popular? Is it not as good as its advocates claim, are there practical problems that impede its implementation, or do companies fail to realize its benefits?

Answer 1

Most of the companies these days follow the 360 appraisal method as they feel that it will enhance the evuation process. But 360 also has certain negative results when subordinates are asked to rate. In some instances supervisors might be hard on subordinates to get things done. In this case the subordinates will fail to analyse why the superiors behave like this and instead will tend to give them a lower rating.

In order to avoid these kind of scenarios companies use sole determinant to do performance rating. There are even more practical problems to the 360 appraisal which the companies feel that might impede the implementation of the process and they are as follows:

1. Lack of confidentiality
2. Biased review
3. Hectic process

Hence companies stick to supervisor's review instead of having a complete 360 review