People tend to dislike peer evaluations for the same reason they dread annual employee appraisals with their bosses: Nobody likes to be judged. And sometimes, no matter how fair the assessments may be, if they aren't 100% positive, some employees will perceive them as personal attacks. If they're not done properly, peer reviews are no more useful than poorly executed annual evaluations.
According to Daniel E. Martin, PhD, a professor in the Department of Management at California State University, East Bay, some limitations in using peer evaluations include:
Another drawback to peer evaluations, also known as 360s, is employees' ability to give their feedback online instead of on paper.
Feedback is critical; everyone needs it and most of us don't get enough, said executive leadership coach and author of Leverage Your Best, Ditch the Rest, Madeleine Hohman Blanchard. Peer review is a good idea, but it all depends on how it's done. We are getting addicted to the anonymous, online multi-rater 360 degree feedback process which, in my opinion ... as an executive coach, are a real problem for a number of reasons. Not to say they don't have some use, but to me, the problems outweigh the benefits.
John Picciotto, senior manager at Accenture had a different lament. Within our organization we found that using peer reviews either as a substitute or an input into staff's performance reviews did not work very well. One of the greatest issues was how do you handle conflicting or contradictory reviews? Often you would get feedback that said "Joe did a poor job of x" and feedback that said "Joe did a great job of x". The questions that would come up were:
Director of career services for King & Bishop, Marilyn Santiesteban has mixed feelings about peer evaluations. On the one hand she thinks they are a great idea. On the other hand, she feels they are poorly executed and, therefore, ineffective. Their ineffectiveness, she says, stems from the fact that employees either give their peers positive reviews – even when there are problems – or they use peer reviews as an excuse to vent about their co-workers personal habits, such as taking smoke breaks or making personal calls.
As employee evaluations go, peer reviews have the potential to be the very useful because they can provide supervisors and managers with insights they might never get during their own feedback sessions or annual employee evaluations. Conversely, if they're done poorly, have the potential to do a lot of harm.
According to Daniel E. Martin, PhD, a professor in the Department of Management at California State University, East Bay, some limitations in using peer evaluations include:
• The time demands placed on raters to finish the evaluations
• Peers identifying and punishing raters who provide negative information
• Employees cajoling peers to provide good ratings
• Peers conspiring to provide each other with good ratings
• Plain old bias (e.g. I’m going to rate this person poorly/well because I hate/like him)
• The need for management/consultants to help interpret results, and companies' failure to provide ways that managers can act on the feedback they receive
• Peers identifying and punishing raters who provide negative information
• Employees cajoling peers to provide good ratings
• Peers conspiring to provide each other with good ratings
• Plain old bias (e.g. I’m going to rate this person poorly/well because I hate/like him)
• The need for management/consultants to help interpret results, and companies' failure to provide ways that managers can act on the feedback they receive
Another drawback to peer evaluations, also known as 360s, is employees' ability to give their feedback online instead of on paper.
Feedback is critical; everyone needs it and most of us don't get enough, said executive leadership coach and author of Leverage Your Best, Ditch the Rest, Madeleine Hohman Blanchard. Peer review is a good idea, but it all depends on how it's done. We are getting addicted to the anonymous, online multi-rater 360 degree feedback process which, in my opinion ... as an executive coach, are a real problem for a number of reasons. Not to say they don't have some use, but to me, the problems outweigh the benefits.
John Picciotto, senior manager at Accenture had a different lament. Within our organization we found that using peer reviews either as a substitute or an input into staff's performance reviews did not work very well. One of the greatest issues was how do you handle conflicting or contradictory reviews? Often you would get feedback that said "Joe did a poor job of x" and feedback that said "Joe did a great job of x". The questions that would come up were:
• Which one was right?
• Is this a valid coaching point?
• Is this a valid coaching point?
Director of career services for King & Bishop, Marilyn Santiesteban has mixed feelings about peer evaluations. On the one hand she thinks they are a great idea. On the other hand, she feels they are poorly executed and, therefore, ineffective. Their ineffectiveness, she says, stems from the fact that employees either give their peers positive reviews – even when there are problems – or they use peer reviews as an excuse to vent about their co-workers personal habits, such as taking smoke breaks or making personal calls.
As employee evaluations go, peer reviews have the potential to be the very useful because they can provide supervisors and managers with insights they might never get during their own feedback sessions or annual employee evaluations. Conversely, if they're done poorly, have the potential to do a lot of harm.
Subscribe to this blog by RSS
Powered by Compendium
blog comments powered by
Comments for The Perils of Peer Evaluations