Introduction
The rapidly growing commercial world has led to unrelenting challenges in businesses with businesspersons seeking possible ways of managing their organizations to enhance performance. Following the rising pressure to maintain market demands and build a business reputation with clients, the management teams of different organizations have become a critical factor that significantly determines success in organizations (Richmond et al., 2010). For organizations to remain effective and efficient, executives nowadays are increasingly seeking relevant and time-efficient development experiences. Many business models have emerged with differing perspectives on how to improve management and the rise in knowledge efficiency, shared leadership, continuous technological enhancement, and interdependent partnership require managers to remain competitive with feedback from multiple sources (Richmond et al., 2010). Multi-Source Feedback (MSF) has emerged as an effective leadership development tool used by HR systems for personnel evaluations. Since its advent, multiple reactions of differing perceptions have existed. Hence, this essay seeks to analyze possible concerns from organizational development practitioners and ways of mitigating these concerns.
Synopsis of Multi-Source Feedback (MSF)
Multi-Source Feedback (MSF) is a modern organizational management tool employed by business executives and HR systems for personnel evaluations and entire organizational performance assessment. Richmond et al. (2010) define Multisource feedback (MSF), “as an assessment approach that uses input from peers and colleagues to gather information about an individual’s behavior in the work-place” (p.511). The ultimate rationale of the MSF as an executive development tool is to assist individuals achieve affirmative, quantifiable, and term changes in management actions. From a different definition Atwater, Brett and Atira (2007) assert, “Multisource feedback (MSF), also known as 360-degree feedback, is a process in which a leader receives anonymous feedback from subordinates, peers, bosses, and customers” (p.285). The MSF approach assumes that practitioners’ role in multidisciplinary teams is integral in ensuring meaningful assessment, encouraging achievement of feedback, and successfully changing behavior. This tool thus becomes a significant method of assessing several organizational components of success that include individuals’ professionalism, competence, as well as interpersonal and communication skills.
Major concerns protracting about MSF
In an organization, appraisal or assessment tools become imperative to management if they possess high validity, proper reliability, and towering feasibility with cost-effectiveness and logical considerations being central issues. As noted by Atwater, Brett, and Atira (2007), “although many HR practitioners embrace it as an important mechanism for leadership development, organizations must attend to and address several issues to maximize the utility of multisource feedback (MSF)” (p.286). Despite its achievement in improving organizational appraisal especially in assessing and improving leadership across organizations, MSF has fallen under some sharp criticism on its successful implementation and development on improving employee performance (Richmond et al., 2010). From a series of organizational management studies, researchers have revealed that organizational development practitioners have the challenge of organizing the MSF instrument to suit everyone’s expectations, which is normally a problem. Implementation of the MSF is normally suffering delays following a continuum of issues within the management. The participation of employees and coordination in the MSF assessment process is a critical issue that has continuously disturbed organization development practitioners.
Consistent researches postulate that acceptance and conviction in the appraisal process are becoming issues to the participants, thus leading to biased or negative feedback (Atwater, Brett & Atira, 2007). Feedback is the most critical aspect that helps organizations in evaluating and appraising employees within the organization, as any bias or partiality in feedback leads to unquantifiable judgments. Depending on organizational management and hierarchical order integrated in organizations, members’ participation in the MSF process and feedback delivery may remain hampered by intimidation or discriminating differences amongst the practitioners involved in the implementation process (Richmond et al., 2010). Conventionally, it is uncommon for employees to engage in discussions against their top management whom mostly are the employers in most organizations. According to Atwater, Brett, and Atira (2007), participants involved in the Multisource assessment and feedback delivery process remain restrained as subordinates and peers having the fear of intimidation as their leaders are capable of tracing their responses and this aspect does not promote honest responding from participants.
Ways to mitigate these concerns
Any assessment tool in an organization should prove to be reliable, effective, and valid in its intent and implementation. However, in the current organizational hierarchical order that many organizations have continuously anticipated and some adopted,
successful MSF implementation may always remain a challenge (Richmond et al., 2010). Strengthening the management system in organizations and improving the dissemination of information across the 360-degree feedback circle will help to enhance the participation of subordinates in the MSF assessment process. Developing stringent policies that restrain top officials from accessing important information from the MSF instruments will help in ensuring the freedom and security of participants. Organizational success begins with individuals’ motivation and as noted by Atwater, Brett, and Atira (2007), individuals involved in the MSF assessment and feedback process must change their behaviors and attitudes because to make recommended changes in organizations, one must understand that positive approach towards change is imperative for organizational success and wellbeing.
Reference List
Atwater, L., Brett, J., & Atira, C. (2007). Multisource feedback: lessons learned and implications for practice. Human Resource Management, 46(2), 286-307.
Richmond, M., Canavan, C., Holtman, C., & Katsufrakis, P. (2010). Feasibility of Implementing a Standardized Multisource Feedback Program in the Graduate Medical Education Environment. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 3(4), 511-516.