An individual, be it a staff member or manager, receives feedback from people they work with and interact. This represents a perfect opportunity to capture feedback from a variety of sources, commonly, referred to as the "full circle". The feedback is in relation to work behaviour (what has been observed) and is not a popularity (contest) vote.

Usually, the feedback is provided in relation to key competencies and skills, be they role or organisation specific. We have worked with one of our clients to extend the process to provide feedback to senior executives around core/corporate values (ie. the extent to leader/managers are living the "values").

A well-designed survey tool (be it custom specific or proprietary, research based) provides the individual with specific and comprehensive information on how they come across (behave) whether intended or not.

This feedback allows the individual to focus on areas of importance to them, be it in their current role or career. In the absence of this information, the individual may not be aware of hidden strengths or blind spots (things that they may be holding the person back and preventing them from reaching their fullest role or career potential).

"Self awareness is the cornerstone of development" Center For Creative Leadership

The research and market practice on this question is "split" and it largely depends on your culture (the level of trust, do people comfortably and openly seek and receive feedback for improvement), state of "readiness" and whether your performance management process is linked to remuneration. The latter significantly influences the respondent (feedback giver).

Respondents are more likely to hold back (not tell it how it is) if they perceive the outcome will affect the individual's (participant) career/promotional prospects and/or remuneration outcome (London & Tornow).

As a starting point, we recommend that client organisation go down the development path in order to build confidence, trust, and engender the highest level of buy-in prior to considering a formal link to performance assessment purposes.

Targeted development that is implemented via an individual development plan will have performance improvement flow on effects for both the individual and organisation.

13 Common Mistakes Using 360-Degree Feedback, S Wimmer, Training & Development, May 1998

Getting 360o Feedback Right, MA Peiperl, Harvard Business Review, January 2001

Employee or organisational surveys are typically used to measure such things as employee motivation, employee satisfaction or engagement, effectiveness of HR programs, and the climate or "health" of the organisation, as seen by its internal constituents (its employees).

If used properly, these type of surveys can produce useful information and act as an important feeder for action planning, and implementation of corporate or strategic initiatives.

Firstly you should determine why you are doing the survey and what information you are trying to measure. Once you have defined the purpose you can then examine what is the best tool to use including whether it is externally developed ("generic") or customised specifically to you.

Benchmarking Surveys

If you determine that you want to use an established proprietary survey, then this option may allow you to externally benchmark yourself within your industry etc.

As a guide, benchmarking surveys:

• Do not allow for variation to questions (and language) as this defeats the purpose of benchmarking
• May not offer you high alignment with information that is most important to you
• Can provide powerful external information in relation to your market position and performance (if this is critically important to you)

When considering benchmarking surveys, it is important to consider how your managers and staff will relate to the output. Will they readily accept the dimensions being measured, understand them etc.

Customised Surveys

A customised survey has the potential to yield highest ownership and response rates. It requires a little bit of research to ensure the questions are specific and relevant to the areas your organisation is trying to measure. A professionally designed customised survey (with some expert advice) will engender high user confidence and ensure the process is not seen to be "Mickey Mouse".

As a guide, customised surveys:

• Allow for best match between questions asked and what is being measured
• Allow for use of your own language and measurement dimensions
• Allow for easy assimilation of results/output and encouragement of data ownership

We look at three areas where you can make some improvements and significantly enhance your survey outputs:

Content

• Ask questions about observable behaviour rather than thoughts or motives
• Ask qualitative questions in a quantitative survey - this can provide a way to validate results
• Measure only behaviours that have a recognised link to the company’s performance – resist asking too many questions including those that are peripheral (nice to know)

Format

• Keep sections of the survey unlabelled – extensive research shows that respondents tend to respond similarly to questions they think relate to each other
• Design sections to contain similar number of items, and questions a similar number of words - research shows that the more questions you ask the higher the resulting scores, and higher ratings to questions which contain more words and require more time for reflection

Scale

• Consider using rating items that are spaced equally apart on a continuum
• Invite respondents to provide an estimate of frequency (eg. %) to reduce subjectivity - a large body of research confirms that respondents’ frequency estimations are typically quite reliable ands accurate
• Use a response scale that offers an odd number of options and allow respondents to include a "Don’t Know" or "Not Applicable" – without the latter respondents may feel compelled to provide answers that they know are worthless

"Getting The Truth Into Workplace Surveys" P. Morrel_Samuels, Harvard Business Review February 2002

Depending on the organisation's Performance Management Framework, it may encompass Learning & Development Planning as a key tenet.

Notwithstanding, a formal Learning & Development Planning system has a forward looking focus and is concerned with performance improvement, building individual and organisational capability.

In its simplest form, it consists of an Individual Learning & Development Plan containing 1 - 3 key actions or activities around at least one area of strength and 2 developmental areas.  Regular review of progress is a critical feature of this process to ensure development is on 'track'.

Depending on whether you have a cost or investment philosophy, this will determine whether you regard it (development) as a 'necessary evil' or an 'absolute must' for employee growth and business performance/success.

The likelihood that development will occur if there is an ad hoc and non 'binding' system is limited at best. What is more likely to occur is that due to a lack of a formalised system, training investment may be occurring in non-value adding areas and/or a squandering of funds.

As a guide, a formal Learning & Development Plan is best done after a semi-annual or annual performance review.

A quarterly review of the Learning & Development Plan will ensure that the individual stays focused on development and achieves the desired benefits.

Performance Management is a holistic system of:

• Identifying and articulating performance expectations/objectives and measures, typically, captured in Performance Plan
• Providing regular feedback and coaching support to achieve performance targets
• Reviewing performance against set targets/objectives or performance indicators
• Identifying opportunities for strengthening and/or improving performance, including learning and developmental opportunities

Performance management should not be confined to performance assessment or evaluation, but should encompass the broader aspects of regular and timely feedback from one’s manager, discussion and identification of career development needs etc.

A performance management system, in its totality, is both retrospective (looking back on one's achievements) and forward looking in terms of building individual capability and strengthening performance. Where manager and staff participate equally in setting performance objectives including reviewing progress against these, then the chances of owning the "system" including outcomes are more likely to occur.

Notwithstanding, regular, ongoing communication is the cornerstone to an effective performance management system.

Organisations vary in the timing of their performance planning and review cycles as follows:

• Done to coincide with the individual’s anniversary (although there is a trend towards a set time in the year for all)
• Conducted at a set time:
• Calendar year
• Financial year
• The review cycle can range from quarterly to annually (the latter is the most common although it can be too long and frequency affect tends to creep in)

This is always a vexed issue and depends on how it is managed, rather than whether there is a link per se.  Generally speaking, people will tend to be dissatisfied with their reward if there is a perceived non-alignment of effort/contribution to the reward outcome.

The more transparent the system including the link to reward then this can assist individuals in understanding how the system works.

A broader definition of rewards needs to be considered at the individual level and not just confined to extrinsic (monetary) rewards.

There is also a danger that performance measures set will be predominantly, if not exclusively, quantitative in nature.  We encourage a mix of quantitative and qualitative measures (the latter picking up important behavioural expectations).