Perceptions of Change Following a 360-degree Feedback Intervention
Author: Julia Yvonne Wernke
Publisher:
Published: 2006
Total Pages: 115
ISBN-13:
DOWNLOAD EBOOKAlthough organizations invest significant resources in the development and deployment of 360-degree feedback programs, a limited amount of outcome research has been conducted to explore their effectiveness. Findings from studies investigating the impact of upward and 360-degree feedback interventions on managerial performance are inconsistent. Traditional methods used to assess behavior changes following upward and 360-degree feedback interventions may lead to misleading results because these methods fail to take into account the possibility of different types of change. Golembiewski, Billingsley, and Yeager (1976) developed a typology that delineates the three types of change that may result from organizational development interventions: alpha (actual or true change), beta (change in raters' calibration of rating scale), and gamma change (change in raters' conceptualization of the construct). The present study investigated changes in managerial performance over time through a pre-post study of 360-degree feedback ratings provided at two time points, one-year apart. Participants were 103 managers who were selected to participate in the leadership development program of their employer, a large healthcare organization. Performance changes were explored using both traditional methods (repeated measure analysis of variance and t tests to explore mean ratings differences over time) as well as methods to determine alpha, beta, and gamma change. The present study found that while managers perceived their performance to have improved following a 360-degree feedback and leadership development intervention, the managers' bosses, peers, and subordinates did not report that managerial performance improved overall. Managers' initial performance level, relative to their peers, impacted the magnitude and direction of performance change following the intervention, with low performing managers showing greater rating improvement in comparison to their peers. Different patterns of results were found when analyzing actual ratings compared to gap ratings, however. Gamma and beta change were not identified, suggesting that changes in ratings over time reflected true performance change, or alpha change.