360 Shenanigans

At first, the idea of a 360-degree evaluation seemed like the best thing in the world, when compared to the top-down boss-reportee evaluation. It is indeed better than a single track top-down feedback. But a 360-degree evaluation is not easy to administer. The reality is that, most people are not trained to give feedback. Even if trained, most people lack the maturity and perception to give good useful feedback. So, the evaluation for the entire year or half-year, could hinge on the most recent experience or the single worst experience during the evaluation period. The usefulness of the 360-degree evaluation is lost.

A 360-degree evaluation can also be a two-way feedback. It not only says something to the person being evaluated, it also says something to his/her supervisor/boss. It not only reveals something about the person being evaluated, it also reveals something about the people who are evaluating and the system in which they all function. If the ratings for the same person, on the same criteria, given by different people range all the way from 1 to 10 (on a 10-point scale), while touching almost every score-level in-between, what is going on? If two evaluators, give diametrically opposite scores and feedback, for the same person, on the same criteria, what does that mean?