How Should the Differences in Evaluations from a 360-Degree Survey Be Interpreted?

One of the most important benefits of multi-rater feedback (i.e. 360-degree feedback) is also one of the most confusing (even frustrating) aspects of the process.

360-degree feedback provides a unique opportunity to assess how a person's performance and behavior is viewed by others. Seeing how a group of evaluators perceive a person across a spectrum of behaviors and skills is often a catalyst for change. However, it is interesting to see how different groups of evaluators (managers, colleagues, subordinates and others) can have different judgments of an individual. If these differences are not interpreted correctly, many people begin to question the validity of the feedback simply by seeing these differences. Others find it difficult to reconcile these differences with what they have in mind.

So what to do when there are clear differences of opinion between evaluators? How to take action when there are differing views on what needs to be addressed? Perhaps our own anatomy can shed light on this question.

Our brains perceive depth and distance based on differences between our two eyes and our two ears. In the case of the eyes, spatial mismatch - a difference of just a few arc-seconds - helps the brain understand spatial relationships. As for the ears, a temporal mismatch (time difference) measured in microseconds between the two ears' reception of audible sounds helps us determine distance. We use the differences between sensory data to orient ourselves in space, form impressions of our surroundings, make judgments and make decisions.

Similarly, in multi-rater feedback, differences in feedback offer a rich insight to help the participant navigate performance. Having more than one evaluator gives participants access to a depth of insight that they would not have with a single evaluator (unlike performance evaluations given by a manager). While differences in assessment may occasionally create confusion for the individual ("My manager thinks my communication skills are inadequate, but my subordinates don't think so!"), they often provide additional clarity.

Interpreting Differences in Perception

Asking the following questions can help us make sense of the differences between the evaluations:

1. Does my behavior change depending on the group I am working with?
2. Does my relationship, history, experience, etc. with these different groups cause them to see me differently even though my behavior does not change?
3. Are these differences the result of external factors ("I introduced a new practice that my manager wanted, but my subordinates didn't like it.")?
4. Should I keep some of these groups better informed about what is happening?
5. Can I do something that I do well for a high-scoring group and apply it to a low-scoring group?
6. Could it be that some of the evaluators benefit more from some of my behaviors than others? What can I learn from this?

I would point out that none of the above are excuses, but possibilities that open the door to understanding the differences in 360-degree feedback. Seeing the value behind these differences can add depth to the already valuable 360-degree feedback, rather than creating confusion and frustration.