Reference no: EM131481096

360-Degree Appraisal at Johnson & Johnson

In order to provide a broader perspective for performance appraisal and encourage employee development, Johnson & Johnson Advanced Behavioral Technology (JJ-ABT), based in Denver, Colorado, has instituted a new 360-degree feedback system. The new system allows employees to compare their own perceptions with the views of others such as superiors, peers, subordinates, and external customers.

According to company executives, the most important consideration in implementing the system is choosing the right individuals to be raters. To assemble the rating group, JJABT employees develop a list of key internal and external customers with whom they interact and then recommend five to ten individuals to serve as raters. Each employee's supervisor still has the ultimate responsibility for the appraisal and ensures that the appropriate raters are selected. This helps prevent ratees from stacking the deck with supportive customers or colleagues who will give high ratings.

Once managers decide who will do the rating, the criteria by which the ratee will be evaluated are made clear. Since the supervisor is most aware of the ratee's individual work tasks and goals, the various raters ideally evaluate the ratee only on the behaviors or work incidents that they have directly observed. The JJABT 360-degree appraisal form includes items such as the following:

Does the employee:

- Follow up on problems, decisions, and requests in a timely fashion?

- Clearly communicate his or her needs/expectations?
- Share information or help others?
- Listen to others?
- Establish plans to meet future needs?
- Adhere to schedules?

Raters score these items on a scale ranging from 1 (needs improvement) to 5 (outstanding). Space is also provided for the raters to make written comments.

The employee's supervisor is responsible for summarizing the data and determining the final performance rating. This represents a combination of the comments and ratings from the various raters and the supervisor's own feedback on the ratee's performance. Typically, managers include a mean score and distribution range for each item.

On the basis of the company's experience so far, it seems clear that feedback can't always be taken at face value. For instance, care must be exercised when one rater has given highly negative or positive feedback. JJABT managers stress that the key is to look for trends or patterns in the data. If there are questions or ambiguities in the raters' feedback, supervisors will often solicit additional feedback from the same or new raters. After summarizing the data, the supervisor conducts the formal appraisal interview with the ratee.

To ensure fairness, raters are provided the option of being anonymous or open Feedback. If the rater requests anonymity, then the supervisor must not or her identity to the ratee when discussing the performance review. However, rater is willing to be open, then the supervisor may refer the ratee with questions about his or her feedback to the rater. In this way, it is hoped that the360-degree appraisal can become less an evaluative tool and more a comprehensive system for enhancing communication, facilitating self-development, and improving performance.

Questions:

1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of Johnson & Johnson's 360-degree appraisal?
2. Do you think the rating system is useful? How might you suggest improving it?
3. What are your views on the anonymity issue? Should raters be encouraged to be open? Explain.