Reactions of leaders to 360-degree feedback from subordinates and peers

Facteau, Carolyn L.; Facteau, Jeffrey D.; Schoel, Lynn C.; Russell, Joyce E. A.; Poteet, Mark L.

doi:10.1016/s1048-9843(98)90010-8

Cited by 68 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, these studies have provided support for the two main relationships underlying the hypothesized relationship in Ilgen et al (1979). First, recipients were more accepting of favorable (positive) feedback than unfavorable (negative) feedback (Anseel & Lievens, 2006;Bannister, 1986;Brett & Atwater, 2001;Facteau, Facteau, Schoel, Russel, & Poteet, 1998;Nease, Mudgett, & Quinones, 1999;Stone & Stone, 1985;Tonidandel, Quinones, & Adams, 2002). This finding can be understood in light of the tendency of people to have positive self-views and to see oneself in the best possible light to maintain one's self-esteem (for a review of empirical findings illustrating this selfenhancement tendency, see Sedikides & Gregg, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 83%

The Mediating Role of Feedback Acceptance in the Relationship between Feedback and Attitudinal and Performance Outcomes

Anseel

Lievens

2009

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to increase our understanding of applicant perceptions of feedback by drawing upon feedback process models. In Study 1, participants (N ¼ 125) completed a personality questionnaire as a first stage of a selection simulation. Results showed that the effect of feedback on attitudes toward the organization was mediated by feedback acceptance. In Study 2, participants (N ¼ 252) completed two parallel versions of an in-basket exercise and received informative feedback between the two versions. Results showed that the effect of feedback on subsequent test performance was partially mediated by feedback acceptance. Together, these results highlight the important role of feedback acceptance in selection and suggest new strategies to enhance applicant perceptions in selection.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 83%

The Mediating Role of Feedback Acceptance in the Relationship between Feedback and Attitudinal and Performance Outcomes

Anseel

Lievens

2009

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People are concerned with increasing the positivity of the self as a means for achieving a high level of self-esteem (Sedikides & Strube, 1997). In organisational research, this assumption has also been supported: positive feedback leads to more favourable employee feedback reactions, whereas negative appraisals cause dissatisfaction (Anseel & Lievens, 2006;Bannister, 1986;Brett & Atwater, 2001;Facteau, Facteau, Schoel, Russel, & Poteet, 1998;Halperin, Snyder, Shenkel, & Houston, 1976;Illies, De Pater, & Judge, 2006;Stone & Stone, 1985;Tonidandel, Quiñones, & Adams, 2002). Although feedback sign is an important predictor of employee reactions towards feedback, it does not offer many developmental strategies for practice.…”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Closer Look at the Relationship between Justice Perceptions and Feedback Reactions: The role of the quality of the relationship with the supervisor

Feys¹,

Libbrecht²,

Anseel³

et al. 2008

PSYCHOL BELG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two field studies were undertaken to investigate the nature of the relationship between justice perceptions and feedback reactions. Previous work suggests that the relationship between procedural justice and feedback reactions is mediated by the quality of the relationship with the supervisor. However, there are also good theoretical reasons to hypothesise that the relationship between justice perceptions and feedback reactions is moderated by relationship quality. Across two field studies, we found support for both mediated and moderated relationships. Results of the moderator analyses showed that the positive relationship between justice perceptions and feedback reactions was more pronounced for subordinates in a low-quality relationship with their supervisor. The present results provide useful suggestions for enhancing feedback reactions in organisations.Providing feedback to employees (i.e., giving people information about the outcomes of their achievements with the purpose of stimulating development and learning) is believed to be essential for maintaining and increasing employee motivation and satisfaction (Jawahar, 2006). Although meta-analytic results have shown that feedback interventions do not always increase performance, they suggest that these interventions improve performance on average (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996). In organisations, the assumption also prevails that giving employees feedback is essential to improve individual and organisational performance. Traditionally, organisations rely on performance appraisal and performance reviews as vehicles for giving employees feedback, thereby improving their performance (Gregory & Levy, 2008).Although almost every large organisation uses some type of performance appraisal method, there seems to be quite some dissatisfaction about performance appraisal. Lawler (1994, p. 106) aptly summarised this discontent- 128 JUSTICE PERCEPTIONS AND FEEDBACK REACTIONS ment: "The problem -and it is well documented -is that most performance appraisal systems do not motivate individuals nor guide their development effectively". In recent years, there have been calls to conduct more research about the efforts organisations can undertake to turn performance appraisal into a more effective feedback intervention (e.g., Levy & Williams, 2004). In this regard, it seems especially important to improve our understanding of why and when employees are inclined to accept and use feedback given to them. Only when employees are prepared to use and accept the feedback they receive during performance appraisal, it can be expected that performance appraisal leads to employee development (Anseel, Lievens, & Levy, 2007).The present paper aims to gain a better insight into the factors that can enhance feedback reactions in performance appraisal. Recent research suggests that two principles are of key importance. On the one hand it seems important for employees to establish a good relationship with their supervisor (the provider of feedback). On the other hand it is crucial for employees to ...

show abstract

“…Self-ratings are often used as a baseline in 360-degree feedback -a place to begin discussions of strengths and weaknesses during the developmental feedback system. When self-and other-ratings are in agreement, the discussion and development plan are more easily navigated (Facteau, Facteau, Russell, & Poteet, 1998). However, when the individuals' ratings are different than those provided by others, they may be caught off guard by the less favorable impressions held by those around them or they may discount evaluations they don't feel they deserve (Facteau et al,Table 4.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality antecedents of self-other rating discrepancy

Sinha¹,

Mesmer‐Magnus²,

Viswesvaran³

2010

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Multi-rater feedback systems are increasingly being used in organizations for assessment and development. Research suggests self-ratings are often uncorrelated with other-ratings, which has implications for ratee receptivity to feedback. Prior research suggests ratee personality may offer insight into selfother rating discrepancy. We explored the extent to which five work-related personality dimensions offer explanatory variance in self-other rating discrepancy using archival data of 527 employees from a large financial organization. Analyses of 487 self-peer dyads and 501 self-supervisor dyads revealed low agreement among self-, supervisor-, and peer-ratings of performance. Self-raters high on extraversion, dominance, cultural conformity, cynicism, and detail orientation were somewhat likely to over-rate their performance as compared to peer ratings. Cynical and detail-oriented raters were likely to over-rate their performance as compared with supervisor ratings. Detail orientation and cultural conformity interacted to predict self-other rating discrepancies for both supervisors and peers. Implications for research and practice are discussed. Keywords: self-other rating discrepancy, rater personality, supervisor/peer ratings, 360-feedback.Resumen. En los últimos tiempos, se está incrementando el uso de sistemas de feedback multi-evaluador por parte de las organizaciones para la evaluación y el desarrollo de su personal. La investigación sugiere que las autoevaluaciones del desempeño a menudo no correlacionan con las evaluaciones de los demás, lo que tiene implicaciones para la receptividad del evaluado al feedback. La investigación previa sugiere que la personalidad del evaluado puede ser un punto importante en la discrepancia entre las autoevaluaciones y las evaluaciones de los otros. En el presente estudio se exploró el grado en que cinco dimensiones de personalidad relacionadas con el trabajo explican la varianza en la discrepancia entre las autoevaluaciones y las evaluaciones de los otros, usando los datos de archivo de 527 empleados de una gran organización financiera. El análisis de 487 parejas de autoevaluaciones y evaluaciones de los compañeros y 501 parejas de autoevaluaciones y evaluaciones de los supervisores reveló un bajo acuerdo entre las autoevaluaciones, las evaluaciones de los supervisores y las evaluaciones de los compañeros. Los evaluados altos en extraversión, dominancia, conformidad cultural, cinismo y orientación al detalle fueron algo más probables a sobre-estimar su desempeño en las autoevaluaciones comparadas con las evaluaciones que recibían de sus compañeros. Los evaluados cínicos y orientados al detalle tendieron a sobre-estimar su desempeño en comparación con las evaluaciones de sus supervisores. La orientación al detalle y la conformidad cultural interactuaron para predecir las discrepancias entre las autoevaluaciones y las evaluaciones de los supervisores y los compañeros. Finalmente, se discuten las implicaciones para la investigación y la prác-tica profesional de estos...

show abstract

Reactions of leaders to 360-degree feedback from subordinates and peers

Cited by 68 publications

References 37 publications

The Mediating Role of Feedback Acceptance in the Relationship between Feedback and Attitudinal and Performance Outcomes

The Mediating Role of Feedback Acceptance in the Relationship between Feedback and Attitudinal and Performance Outcomes

A Closer Look at the Relationship between Justice Perceptions and Feedback Reactions: The role of the quality of the relationship with the supervisor

Personality antecedents of self-other rating discrepancy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About