"... !!The Cardinal Signs of Multi-Rater Feedback!!..." We are often asked the best way to implement 360 degree Feedback (or multi-rater feedback) within an organisation, which is a little like asking what is the best flavour ice cream. It depends!! What we can say with some degree of certainty however is what generally does not work so well. So I thought that I would offer our guide as to "How to pretty much be guaranteed to get multi-rater feedback implementation wrong" or as we say "How to SCROD it" Starting in the middle Chinese Whispers Read this its good for you Only a questionnaire Diving In as with most things in life not all multi-rater feedback software suppliers are born equal, and it may be to your benefit to consider which of these issues are important to your company before rather than after choosing the best route for you. Starting in the middle Boards and senior management often feel that they are above improving, and that this type of thing is really only for the lower ranks. They start in the middle because it is too expensive to start at the bottom. The idea that there will be any credibility for a process where there is a limit on accountability is flawed before it starts, and will almost certainly lead to implicit if not explicit rejection and subversion of the 360-degree process. Chinese Whispers Time and again companies start 360's without understanding the number of people that will be touched by it within an organisation. Staff find that they have been "invited" to provide confidential feedback on colleagues without any idea of the context. If there is no formal and rigorous process to communicate the context and rationale, then people will inevitably form their own conclusions, and these conclusions will travel faster and more effectively than any corporate medium Read this its good for you There are generally two ways to get the report wrong; 1) Ignoring the concerns of the individual Very few people receive theirmulti-rater feedback report without some sense of trepidation. Many companies compound this issue by forcing them to review the report in the first instance with either their manager or a member of the HR staff, without giving the individual the time and resources to consider carefully the content and any learning that they might wish to draw from it. 2) Creating reports that are unreadable The desire to offer as much information as possible to the individual can be extremely counterproductive, particularly if the data is presented at a level of numeracy that the individual is not comfortable with. In addition to this the logic of the report should also be considered carefully. There is no joy in having to read 3 or 4 separate parts of a report to understand a single issue. We would argue that, particularly in the first instance, that the simpler a report the better it will be received, understood and acted upon. This does not mean that reports need to be short, only that the detail needs to be directly relevant and easily understandable. Only a questionnaire Personal feedback on other colleagues' performance is a serious matter that relatively few people embrace lightly. A standard questionnaire should normally take anywhere between 20 and 30 minutes (numeric feedback only) or 45 to 60 minutes with numeric and written feedback. A standard project for say 10 people in a department will require that several members of staff may have to complete many questionnaires perhaps as many 6 or 8. This is equivalent to a full days work, and the problem can be compounded if several departments are completing 360 processes at the same time. Companies often release multi-rater feedback projects without any consideration for this fact. Basically asking already overstretched staff to find an extra working day at little notice within a two week or three week cycle. This is not conducive to good quality feedback, or engendering confidence in the process. Diving In Many companies use 360 degree feedback systems because they have heard great things from colleagues, or quite simply that everyone is doing it. This is often without considering the context and impact within the culture of the company. The 360 process is at its best when used a personal development tool, but if the resource or budget to invest in personal development is not available, or there is no obvious reward for growth from personal development then the process is bound to fail and be consigned to the "yet another initiative" trash bin.