360 Degree Feedback Facilitating Feedback Dr Ceri Thomas The Performance Management Group www.tpmg.

com

Background and Introduction Frequently occurring scenarios 1. How to conduct a meeting with line manager on my feedback (practising a meeting) 2. Role confusion and/or breakdown of relationship with line manager 3. My team dont seem to engage with their objectives 4. No-one seems to think I am any good at coaching my staff? 5. The difficult subordinate who wont change their ways 6. This work does not really interest me 7. Long overdue appreciation 8. Frustrated ambition 9. Particular skill development needs 360 Degree Feedback Case Study 1. Background 2. Briefing 3. Feedback Instrument and Process 4. Management Information Reading List

Background and Introduction

This paper is primarily about how to facilitate constructive 360 degree feedback sessions. The ideas are based on our experience over the years in many different client settings and cultures. We recognize and have witnessed very different client expectations, not least in the way results are released to the individuals receiving the feedback. We begin therefore by putting the feedback sessions in the context of the choices that are available, given TPMGs 360 degree feedback software orbitPLUS. We then discuss how we see the role of the feedback facilitator and how the facilitator can usefully address some frequently occurring scenarios. We conclude with a brief client case study.

Release of Results
Deciding how and when to release results is one of the key choices to make in the 360 process. Here are the four main options (as they are supported in TPMGs orbitPLUS software): 1. Enable the subject (the individual receiving the feedback) to compile their own results on line by clicking an appropriate button in the system. This would mean they are probably the first to see such results and disallows any intervention by their line manager, coach or HR e.g. to ensure a safe environment for the

Facilitating Feedback

TPMG 2009

subject to see their results. While some organizations use this approach, it assumes that all subjects are experienced in using 360 and will be able to interpret the results dispassionately, accurately and constructively. A variant of this is for the software provider to release the results directly to the subject and the line manager as soon as the feedback is complete (or as complete as it is likely to get). Clearly it is preferable in these circumstances to provide the subjects with at least a basic briefing on the purpose of the 360, the process, the format of the results and how to get most value form the results. 2. HR to release the results directly to the subject on line after HR has had the opportunity to check the results in advance of the subject seeing them. Again, it assumes the subject is experienced in the use of 360. Such release can be combined with simultaneous release to the subjects line manager, alongside an explanatory email. Alternatively the subject may be given the option to share the results with the line manager if and when s/he wishes to. 3. Release the results to the line manager, via an accompanying email, with an instruction either to meet the subject to review the results together or to release the results directly, prior to a meeting. This is a popular approach. It maintains the line managers role as integral to the process and gives them the responsibility for releasing and discussing the results. It does, however, rely on the line managers understanding the 360 process and being skilled in handling feedback meetings. It gives the line manager the opportunity and responsibility to intervene if the results contain malicious and potentially damaging feedback. The downside is that the subject may feel that the feedback process will concentrate more on the line managers interpretation and priorities at the time and less on what the subject sees as personal to them. 4. Release via a paper report at a face to face meeting with either line manager, HR or coach (internal or external) i.e. the subject does not see the feedback prior to the meeting. This is the orthodox method and usually the one recommended by professional coaches. It aims to ensure a safe environment in which the subject is clearly briefed about the results, how to interpret them and get the most value from them and how to take their personal development forward. The main part of this paper is about such sessions. Clearly, such feedback sessions can take place alongside any of the 4 methods above. Note: in all cases, there is the facility to email the results to HR, line manager and subject as a PDF. While this is a popular format, it relies on the security of the email system as used by line manager and subject.

The Facilitators Role

TPMG starts from the belief that the role of facilitator or coach is to support the individual receiving the feedback (the subject) in interpreting the data so that they can understand it and use it to inform their own development. The facilitator has no other agenda and will have no inside knowledge of the individual or their

Facilitating Feedback

TPMG 2009

circumstances to impart or use to steer the individual. We often introduce ourselves to the subject as their research assistant for the period of the feedback meeting. We are there to assist them, not to praise or criticise them or to tell them what to do. Underlying this is the principle that the ownership of the feedback and crucially any development actions that may arise should lie with the individual (not the coach) our role is to promote that ownership by the individual - who eventually will need to act on it (no-one else can take that responsibility). This may require a fair degree of self-restraint for the facilitator: avoiding the temptation to talk when we should listen, to tell when we should ask and to explain when we should explore. Having said that, there are times when a few tips, steers and simple exercises will be welcomed by the individual. There may be times when referral to organized training will be appropriate, but the key here is to find specific work-based activities that will take the individual forward, rather than to signal that they just need to get some training. In this section we look first at some frequently occurring scenarios (FOSs) and a case study from an organization to explore the whole 360 degree feedback process in practice. return to top

Facilitating Feedback

TPMG 2009

1. Frequently Occurring Scenarios (FOSs)

1. 1 How to conduct a meeting with line manager on my feedback (practising a meeting) I dont have a good relationship with my line manager. I think we find each other difficult to talk to and we have not had a serious conversation about my performance and how I feel about things for a couple of years. But I do want to discuss this 360 report with her. She has given me some fairly critical feedback here and I need to discuss this in context of the other feedback I have had. This might be a circumstance where the facilitator and the individual rehearse the sort of conversation that would help both the individual and the line manager. 360 feedback provides an opportunity to reopen conversations with the line manager it legitimises a conversation that otherwise might be difficult to set up. It may be that the line manager has mixed feelings about any serious conversation with the individual and might be feeling anything from boredom, anxiety, stress or even guilt. The line manager needs to be assured that the individual is taking responsibility for their own performance and development. The individual should demonstrate their openness and positive approach. A professional line manager will hear this message and feel an obligation to engage in the conversation, perhaps as a fresh start. Equally the individual cannot guarantee a positive response and can only start the ball rolling and maintain a positive and professional approach expecting the line manager to reciprocate. (Failure of line management here, is of course a risk. The hope is that a positive and professional approach by the individual can unblock the relationship. But, if not, there may be serious questions about the line managers own performance or capability, which their own 360 or other diagnostics should uncover. In the worst cases HR will need to intervene.) The advice here might include (where Jo is the subject and Hilary is the line manager): You need to signal that you have heard the feedba ck and that you intend to take on board the key messages. Equally, your relationship with your line manager is an important part of your working environment it is likely that your success (and possibly hers) depends on a good working relationship. It would be unrealistic to assume that you can significantly improve performance without addressing this. You might usefully ask for a meeting with her along the following lines: Jo: Hi Hilary, I have just had my 360 feedback session and I just wanted to say that I found it useful and informative. There were two or three things I was pleased to see and a couple of important aspects that I need to look at. Could we schedule an hour for me to share my own assessment and my ideas as to what I might do to take things forward?

Facilitating Feedback

TPMG 2009

At the meeting: Jo: Morning Hilary, thanks again for the 360 feedback. Would it make sense if I were to summarise what I thought it said? Hilary: Yes please do Jo: Great, well on the plus side people seemed to appreciate x, y and z...... and then against that its clear that my direct reports find me unapproachable at times and insufficiently supportive of their work and development not a good message but if thats what they see then I have to deal with it. Before I go on, could I ask ho w you see my stronger and weaker points? Hilary : Thanks, Jo. Yes I broadly agree with that assessment. The thing is what are you going to do about it?. Jo: Well I certainly need to have an open door style and I think I could do that as long as I am clear with the team when I really need to work undisturbed on something. What do you think? How can I be more approachable and ensure I get the reports done? Hilary : Yes I agree you need to do both. Perhaps give people a fl avour of your upcoming week at weekly meetings to suggest when you would like to work undisturbed, if possible. Jo: Yes, thanks Ill do that. Hilary: You might even share the report writing around a bit more, once you have established the sort of quality and format you require it sounds like you might be doing a lot of work that they could be doing and need to do if they are to progress? Jo: Good point...................... and at the end of the session: Jo: So Hilary, I think the key points that I need to work on are:.1, 2 and 3....Does that sound right to you? Hilary : Yes, thats about it...that should make a big difference. Jo: It would help me a lot if we could spend half an hour reviewing this in a months time. Would that be OK with you? Hilary : Excellent. See you then. return to top

Facilitating Feedback

TPMG 2009

1.2 Role confusion and/or breakdown of relationship with line manager. One of the potential outcomes of a 360 exercise is that it shines light on issues that have been ignored, concealed or avoided for too long. The exercise will tend then to elicit feedback of the sort that should have been discussed by the individuals concerned in their day to day work. It may be also that such issues have been discussed or addressed before but not to final resolution or satisfaction of one or both parties. In extreme cases, this is the sort of situation where individual and line manager are to all intents and purposes not speaking and where all trust has apparently been lost, if it ever existed. Clearly there are limits to what the facilitator can do in the course of the feedback session. In fact the session may need to be curtailed or postponed because the individual is not in a frame of mind to discuss the underlying issues with any degree of detachment. The facilitator should seek agreement of the individual to approach HR and discuss the situation and recommend urgent conciliation and resolution. The less difficult and sensitive cases are where there is genuine misunderstanding about what the individual is expected to do, or a lack of sufficient knowledge to enable them to undertake the role. In these circumstances, the quicker the individual meets with their line manager the better, to resolve the misunderstanding. It may be prudent to dedicate a meeting solely to this, in advance of any fuller discussion about the 360 feedback generally. return to top 1.3 My team dont seem to engage with their objectives. My feedback suggests that I dont lead the performance of my team very well; I dont set clear objectives and I dont hold people to account. I am surprised , because I go through the business plan with each individual and tell them what their targets and objectives are. There could be many facets to this issue: the particular style of performance management; the individuals personal style (which might be overly directive); the individuals clarity of communication; etc.

So it is always wise to ask the individual to describe what goes in these discussions, how they manage them, how they ensure the involvement of the team members and how they ensure their input is sought and acted upon. Traditional management by objectives (MBO) methods of managing performance are often criticised for being ineffective on a number of counts (see Management by Whose Objectives by Harry Levinson for a highly regarded critique).

Facilitating Feedback

TPMG 2009

Here are some examples: laying down detailed objectives for an individual denies the importance or value of spontaneous and creative activities that an individual who takes responsibility might initiate themselves; there may be insufficient emphasis on what the individual needs to achieve as part of a team or at very least in concert with others (including the line manager); MBO tends to underestimate the importance of how results are achieved compared with the more easily measured whats. Most managers will say they get their staff to agree these objectives, but the result is often far less personal ownership than the manager might expect or is required for the job to be done well.

An alternative approach might be to run a simple business planning or visioning session. The stated purpose of the session will be to enable the team to look forward at where it is aiming to be in, say, 12 months time. It might usefully be run by a facilitator (perhaps an internal training officer) and use a framework such as the one shown below. It might take place on a single session or spread over several sessions, depending on the complexity of the detail required: The group is prompted along the following lines using flip charts etc. What is going well what do we enjoy doing what are we best at? What is not going so well? What will success look like in 12 months time? o what will people be saying about us? o what will we have achieved? a useful exercise here is for the team (or teams in syndicate rooms) to draft a press release dated 12 months hence which summarises both the teams achievements and its future ambitions.

What needs to change and what help might we need? What will this mean for us as individuals? o this might be the point where individuals begin to focus on their personal contributions

What plans can we put in place with realistic timescales and personal accountabilities/lead roles?

The value of such an approach is that it is genuinely involving and transparent. The manager is able to steer and influence the session without actually having to run it and be responsible for the process. Personal objectives are naturally drawn out of team ambitions, with individuals understanding the interrelatedness of their work etc. As the year progresses, there would be the opportunity to revisit the vision and the plan to re-focus and re-energise the team. Individuals will know that they are

Facilitating Feedback

TPMG 2009

accountable to the team, not just playing a target-setting game with their line manager. It is important to suggest to the manager that the process may be more effective if they use an experienced facilitator rather than try to lead and facilitate at the same time. This need not take on the proportions of a full blown, business team-based performance management strategy, though it might pave the way for that. In summary, this initiative may not address the communications weaknesses of the individual, but it may reduce their negative impact. It may help the individual develop a more involving, less directive style and actually reduce the potential stress of feeling they have to force feed their team with objectives which may or may not be motivational and realistic. return to top 1.4 No-one seems to think I am any good at coaching my staff? My feedback contains quite low scores for coaching and most people have added no comment at all on the subject. I am not sure why this is. When people have a problem with their work, they come and ask me what to do and I tell them. Sometimes I watch what they do and correct them. It often seems to me that they dont really listen to what I tell them because they either ask me the same thing again or they make the same mistake again. This feedback may indicate that the individual would benefit from attending a really good coaching course, but there is an opportunity here to help the individual to dig into the feedback and question their assumptions about coaching. It is a chance to discuss less directive coaching methods, which help an individual focus on what they trying to achieve, to reflect on feedback about how they are currently performing and to generate their own solutions. There are different types of coaching. In this case the manager seems to think it is all about tell. This is an opportunity both to discuss the range of coaching skills and to practice them in the 360 feedback session. A skilled facilitation exercise will provide the individual with an example of coaching that puts them centre stage: asking questions (so what is happening that causes your staff to make repeated mistakes? how much is it about the work environment? how much is it about them as individuals; and how much is it about how you supervise them?) paraphrasing so let me be clear: you have given them very clear instructions and they still repeat the mistakes and you think i t is because they dont listen. follow up questions: what might you do to ensure that you are getting your message across? How can you check their understanding and commitment?

Facilitating Feedback

TPMG 2009

summarising so you think it would be more effective if you set aside time to ask them what they are finding difficult in their job and prompt them for their own ideas as to how they might remove causes of mistakes etc.?

(see an excellent chart The Spectrum of Coaching Skills in Effective Coaching by Myles Downey). return to top 1.5 The difficult subordinate who wont change their ways . I am getting really negative feedback from an individual direct report. I am sure I know who it is. I think they have got something against me and they are clearly not happy. First a word of caution, it is quite common for individuals to guess the wrong person from anonymous feedback and it is important for the facilitator both to point this out and to stress that whoever the respondent it, it is feedback. It may be that the subject needs to meet the person they are thinking about and discuss their working relationship, but they should be clearly advised that the feedback in question may not have come from them and anyway the 360 contract requires that subject s do not go on who said what fishing trips. Once that happens people will soon stop participating in future feedback projects. Whole books have been written on the how to deal with difficult people. Here we try simply to introduce one or two concepts that might unlock a different approach that might be more effective than simply telling someone to change or even try to change them through force of personality or inspirational leadership. Here a few thoughts to help take things forward. There is a difference between finding a solution, which might involve changing the person or their attitude and finding a resolution, which might involve understanding them better and possibly they understanding you better, changing styles of work to ease some of the difficulties or unpleasantness, reframing your assessment of the other person that enables you to see more of their strengths and be less concerned with what you consider to be their weaknesses. Try to see things from their side of the table is a simple phrase but is both powerful and has a solid psychological grounding. Psychologists talk about decentring moving out of a state where we see everything as centred on us to recognising that things look differently for other people. A useful question in the context of this difficult individual might be: what must it be like for someone like that to have someone like me as a boss, with my styles, preferences, anxieties and drives?. This is one step from beginning to understand the other person as an individual with their own needs, expectations and drives, rather than someone who you can keep at arms length. Force field analysis: this sounds a very sophisticated phrase but is simply about understanding the forces that are pushing individuals into conflict: and often the

Facilitating Feedback

10

TPMG 2009

more you push from one side the more they push from the other. Ask yourself what lies behind the resistance? What is blocking that person agreeing to what I want? So instead of pushing harder we might spend our time and energy better by understanding the resisting forces and trying to reduce them (reassurance, sympathy, taking an interest in what the other person is interested in and values in their work, active listening etc.) Coaches often talk about the explaining the difference between someones potential and their performance being the sum of the interference that affects them: lack of self-confidence, trying too hard, distraction by others, boredom, mental clutter, even their line managers style!). If we can reduce the interference, performance will move closer to potential.

As someone said, the most successful salespeople discover peoples needs and meet them rather than trying to change them. return to top 1.6 This work does not really interest me. Understanding what really interests people (which may or may not overlap with what they are currently required to do!) can be a powerful key to unlocking an individuals potential or at very least removing some of the blockages to the achievement of that potential. As a line manager or coach, it can be useful to begin to explore the sort of work that an individual is happy in or excels in which may change over time as the individual gains confidence and is drawn by new ideas and challenges. Butler and Waldroop have identified these 8 types of work that people tend to be motivated by. A 360 session may be a good time to help the subject reflect on the work activities that they really enjoy the things that go to make up a good day at the office. It may helpful to explore how the individual night be helped to shape their job towards those activities. Application of Technology Quantitative Analysis Theory Development and Conceptual Thinking Creative Production inventing unconventional solutions Counselling and Mentoring Managing People and Relationships Enterprise Control running projects and businesses; owning transactions Influence through Language and Ideas storytelling, negotiating and persuading return to top 1.7 Long overdue appreciation. Perhaps not the most obviously constructive outcome in terms of building capability and improving performance, it is nonetheless in many places the most common

Facilitating Feedback

11

TPMG 2009

feeling expressed by subjects. If it is their first 360, they quite often confess that this is the first real feedback and often the clearest statement of appreciation that they have had sometimes in a long career. Occasionally people will become quite emotional about this - a good reason to allow them some time alone to collect their thoughts before proceeding. One of the tasks of the facilitator is then to help the subject move from their sense of relief and appreciation to look objectively at the data and to draw messages from it that can help them improve or make more use of their perceived strengths. return to top 1.8 Frustrated ambition. This can result from a sense of being in the wrong role, which points to a meeting with their line manager, or occasionally that they have outgrown their role, often as indicated by highly positive feedback and high scores on e.g. leadership, managing change, business focus etc. Potentially this is one of the risks for an organization using 360 has it thought through how it can respond to high fliers for whom the 360 exercise prompts a career stock take. Does the organization have a fast track policy or is it prepared to witness a fast exit outcome? This outcome can present the facilitator with a dilemma: who is their client? If the individual (or subject) is their client, certainly as far as the facilitation meeting is concerned, then the conversation can easily take the path of examining career moves and the subject leaving the organization. Clearly the facilitator will be more useful to the subject by focussing them on clarifying factors such as their career goals, their commitment to their present organization, whether their line manager will be a an appropriate source of help and support etc. Of course, the employing organization is also the client (they normally pay the bills). Should the facilitator discuss any such cases with internal HR/Training? There is no standard answer to this. It will depend on the contract entered into both with the employing organization and by extension with the individual subject. The facilitator should at least raise in advance the question of how high fliers will be supported and advised after their 360? If the contract includes HR access to the 360 data, it might be sufficient for the facilitator to recommend that HR examines the data, identifies those that might well be high fliers and plan accordingly (e.g. for new assignments, career development opportunities etc.). return to top 1.9 Particular skill development needs. We have assembled in a separate paper Competency Development Tips a selection of actions that individuals might take, often with the help of others, in advance of, in conjunction with or instead of training programmes. These tips are not repeated here, except for examples in the case of presentation and delegation. presentation: this regularly comes up as an item that can be improved. Initial advice might stress how essential the right sort of preparation is, what you can 12 TPMG 2009

Facilitating Feedback

learn from others and the value of specific feedback about your presentation style from a friend. This is an area where courses will almost always help, if only as a refresher or to identify bad habits that an experienced presenter might have drifted into over the years. Here are some ideas from our Competency Development Tips: o ask a colleague about what you do well and not so well in presentations. o jot down what you want people to know, to be thinking and to be feeling at the end of your presentation. Focus your material and style accordingly. o note down what you observe a good presenter doing, for example: changing tone, volume and pitch to suit the subject, changing pace, leaving pauses for thought after key points, making eye contact with people in the audience, not reading bullet points and turning their back on the audience, introducing what they are going to say and summarising what they have said. delegation: this is often associated with relatively low scores from feedback providers. Typically the problems relate to the subject not planning what and how to delegate particularly not thinking through or understanding how each individual will benefit from a particular type of delegation. Delegation (done poorly) often emerges as a reaction to a given crisis or a statement of frustration from the individual. When managers think ahead about delegation, they tend to think about the task how it will be achieved. What they rarely do is to think ahead about each individual in their team jotting down on one side of paper what their delegation needs and potential are for the period ahead, ensuring that the delegation will stretch and motivate and not stress and threaten. return to top

Facilitating Feedback

13

TPMG 2009

2. 360 Degree Feedback Case Study

This case study pulls together different aspects of supporting 360 degree feedback in practice. 2.1 Background The organization is a well known and well respected public sector organization. It has developed senior and middle management competencies and used these as the basis of 360 feedback: in year one for the top management of 15 or so; in year 2 for around 50 departmental heads and in year 3 for around 150 middle managers and other managers of people. The focus throughout has been personal development with the feedback being owned by the individual but also shared with their line manager after their feedback session with a facilitator. return to top 2.2 Briefing Briefings to everyone involved was offered and actively encouraged in each of the three years of the project. This briefing, lasting around 45 minutes, covered: the purpose of 360 and why it was different from traditional appraisal the process of completing the feedback forms the content and format of results (not least so that people providing feedback could see how their feedback would be presented) tips and recommendations about giving constructive feedback general discussion about issues such as anonymity

It was generally felt that the quality of feedback from people who attended these sessions was significantly higher than from those who did not attend. Anxiety about anonymity etc. (which tended to reduce feedback quality) were much less common amongst those who attended briefings. The briefings were led by TPMG, supported by the organizations training and development manager, whose role in assuring people about anonymity and the use of the feedback was critical: it was always stressed that the 360 was not and would not form part of the individuals personnel record. return to top 2.3 Feedback Instrument and Process The questionnaire was structured around the relevant competencies. Each competency (e.g. Personal impact and effectiveness) was addressed via 3-5 behaviour statements e.g. Nigel is aware of impact of own behaviour on others. The respondent was asked the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with this

Facilitating Feedback

14

TPMG 2009

statement (on a 5 point scale in this case) and the importance they attached to this (again on a 5 point scale from Not Important to Extremely Important). In all there were around 35 scale questions. The respondent was encouraged to add specific examples and comments in text boxes for each of the 10 competencies. They were also asked to offer overall comment under these headings: Functional or specialist expertise Professional and personal development What I really value What I would like to see more of What I would like to see less of Any final comments

Most people invited feedback from 7-10 other people, including their line manager, peers, direct reports and external contacts. (It is quite common for these numbers to be higher in other organizations, especially where directors and senior managers are the subjects.) The response rate from the respondents was over 90%. Feedback facilitation sessions with a TPMG facilitator were scheduled over several weeks, allowing 4 sessions per day, each typically lasting 90 minutes. The session typically followed this pattern. The TPMG facilitator printed two copies of the feedback report (usually around 25 pages long). Having read the feedback and made some preparatory notes, the facilitator met the subject and explained their role My role here today is to act as your research assistant first in explaining the format of the report and then in helping you to interpret it and draw your own conclusions and plans. First, I would like to go through the format of the report with you, which takes about 5 minutes not to look at the substance, but simply so that when you read it yourself you can interpret it correctly. When we have done that I would ask you to read the report, which is likely to take between 20 and 30 minutes. I shall be outside and ask you to call me in when you are ready to discuss it. (This approach seems to work well. The subject is not disturbed while they are reading the report and is not concerned about how their own reactions are observed or about the behaviour of the facilitator (!) during this time). It is still a safe environment, but ensures the facilitator is on hand to answer any pressing enquiries or provide any support.). On returning to the room, the discussion might open along the following lines (in as light a style as possible, without appearing trivial): Facilitating Feedback 15 TPMG 2009

So Nigel, first of all, did the feedback sound like you did you recognise yourself in it? What were you pleased to see? What did you see that you might be concerned about OK, perhaps we could look at the overall picture in the first chart...what is this telling you? (From here drill down more into detail as the results indicate, using the sort of coaching techniques we have described elsewhere.) There are several key strengths here, as you have identified. In what ways do you think you might be able to make more of them? Are there messages here about what your colleagues would like to see more of? Looking at the 2 or 3 things you are (most) concerned about...how do you think you might address those....how will that help your capability and performance in the team? Thinking about meeting your line manager, who by the way has not seen your results yet but will have access to them at the end of the day, what would you like to discuss? What would be your aim in that session? Looking a year ahead, say, how would you like to see the pattern of that chart change? How will that help your overall performance? As you draw the session to a close it can be useful to help the subject rehearse how they might go about acknowledging and thanking their feedback providers, without in any way appearing to put them on the spot or appear to be probing for who said what! return to top 2.4 Management Information The organizations management were presented at the end of the project with statistical and graphical information which showed: the average score for each behaviour statement (arranged in rank order) alongside the highest and lowest average score for the individuals in the project. This provided a simple overview of the perceived strengths and weaknesses of the group (e.g. strongest on is a reliable team player and weakest on challenges poor performance and behaviour); detailed charts showing the average performance and importance scores for each statement; the performance gaps according to the difference between performance and importance for each statement/behaviour; and the perception gaps between self perception and others perceptions. 16 TPMG 2009

Facilitating Feedback

Reading List
360 Degree Feedback. Peter Ward. IPD 1997. Effective Coaching. Myles Downey. Texere 2001 Fear of Feedback. Jay Jackman and Myra Strober. Harvard Business Review April 2003 Getting 360-Degree Feedback Right. Maury Peiperl. Harvard Business Review January 2001. How to Motivate Your Problem People. Nigel Nicholson. Harvard Business Review January 2003. Job Sculpting: The Art of Retaining Your Best People. Timothy Butler and James Waldroop. Harvard Business Review September October 1999. Management by Whose Objectives. Harry Levinson. Harvard Business Review. July August 1970 Managers as Facilitators. Richard Weaver and John Farrell. Berrett Koehler 1997 Managing Change and Making it Stick. Roger Plant. Fontana 1987 return to top

Facilitating Feedback

17

TPMG 2009