Here's one: "Uses specialist skills to analyse, apply and organise group engagement frameworks for fully identifying and synthesising client requirements and internal response". Rate me on this 1 to 5, please. Could this question be a little unfair? Assume you know what the 'specialist skills' and 'engagement frameworks' are. Are not analysis, application and organisation different activities, likewise identifying and synthesising? And if you can say that I do all this for clients, you also have to know about the 'internal response' before you can answer. Is this example exaggerated? Not really, I've seen worse - some that didn't make sense at all!
Faced with a few of these, it's hardly surprising that respondents leave blanks or just give 'down the middle' responses. And of course, what sense can the manager make of this kind of feedback: "They rated me '2' - What do I do now?"
How about this: rate me on "Thinks about how he can improve". How do you know what I think about? Not exactly an observable behaviour. Would you prefer "Finds ways in which s/he can improve financial skills"? More useful information?
The "What do I do now" is the most critical result of a 360 profile. If it doesn't tell me something about that, what is the point? Pitfall No. 11:
Using complex questions, complicated competencies, ambiguous questions - respondents find it hard to answer or get irritated, recipients don't know what to do as a result.
[more]Labels: 360 feedback, Communication, Questionnaire |
