360 DEGREE FEEDBACK

Effectiveness of 360 Degree Feedback on Employee's Performance- Marriott Hotel, Regents Park, London

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction3

Background of the study3

Problem Statement5

Overview of the Marriott Hotel, Regents Park, London6

Purpose of the study7

Significance of the study7

Rationale of the study8

Chapter 2: Literature Review10

Understanding 360° feedback12

Historical development and evolution of 360° feedback14

Differences between 360° and traditional performance appraisal18

Extent of use of 360° feedback18

Potential Benefits Of 360° Feedback21

Difficulties Associated With 360° Feedback24

Chapter 3: Methodology27

Research design27

Sample selection28

Data collection28

Data Analysis28

References29

Appendices37

Questionnaire37

Chapter 1: Introduction

The proposed study will discuss the effectiveness of 360 degree feedback on employee's performance. A Questionnaire survey will be conducted at Marriott Hotel, Regents Park, London, where the 20 hotel managers will be asked different questions regarding the effectiveness of using the 360 degree feedback system on their employee's performance.

Background of the study

User acceptance of subordinate ratings is an essential prerequisite to effective upward appraisal. This also applies to the peer appraisal component of the 360° feedback process. Several commentators have indicated that a key to successful implementation of a peer evaluation system is gaining the acceptance of targeted employees. While peer evaluations may provide valid and reliable measures of performance, an obstacle to their use in organisations is resistance by potential or actual users of this particular assessment approach.

A peer system using raters with higher levels of education and experience was viewed as fairer as and more satisfying than a peer system using raters of lower education and experience. This finding suggests that a rating system where raters are perceived as competent by ratees leads to higher levels of acceptance because the system is viewed to be fair and just.

Klimoski, R, Inks, (2000) suggest that hotels should consider the following issues when implementing a peer appraisal system in order to increase employee acceptance. First, they point out that the developmental nature of the peer feedback should be stressed. Second, employees should feel that they are actively involved in the system and that they have a “voice” in the decision-making process. Third, they argue that raters should be able to see the value of their efforts in the peer assessment system and that the feedback should be seen as a valuable tool for performance improvement. If these conditions are met, they argue that stakeholders in the peer appraisal process will be more positive towards and more likely to accept this approach to performance appraisal.

Task focus, in the context of Druskat and Wolff's (2009) research, refers to the extent to which individuals are motivated to achieve their tasks and goals and also the absence of “social loafing”. They define group viability in terms of a group's ability to continue working together effectively. Open communications basically refers to the fact that members felt that communication flowed more effectively between members of the group after peer appraisal. Finally, member relationships essentially refers to the extent to which members are satisfied with the group and feel that the group is cohesive. These findings are encouraging for organisations using or planning to introduce peer feedback systems, or the ...