The Mechanism Of 360° Performance Feedback

On the basis of literature analysis, applying the related theories on self-regulation model, self-efficacy and performance model, this paper studied the mechanism of 360-degree performance feedback by case study, questionnaire surveys and experiments. The focus of this paper is upon the mechanism of performance feedback, the factors influencing the mechanism, the structure of performance dimensions and the performance appraisal from performance feedback sources.This paper consisted of four parts:In study 1, the practice of 360-degree performance feedback was analyzed by case study in a joint venture. The factors influencing the mechanism of 360-degree performance feedback were identified.In study 2, the performance feedback-seeking behavior of 305 employees was measured by questionnaire surveys; which showed the following results: (1) The model of seeking individual performance feedback was the same as the model of seeking organization's performance feedback. But in the process of seeking peers performance feedback, the subjects seek more positive performance feedback of peers; (2) Managers were more positive than ordinary employees in performance feedback-seeking behavior; (3) The employees with higher performance were more positive than those with lower performance in performance feedback-seeking behaviors.In study 3, the response strategies for negative information feedback of performance feedback receptor were analyzed by questionnaire survey. This research included two parts:In part 1, the survey instrument on the response strategies for negative performance feedback was developed on the basis of investigating 205 employees.In part 2, using questionnaire surveys, 169 managers were measuredon performance feedback-seeking behavior, self-efficacy, performance and the response strategies. The results showed: (1) The more positive performance feedback-seeking behavior, the more possible the managers adopt the effectiveness-oriented response strategies; (2) The managers with higher self-efficacy, are more positive in performance feedback-seeking behavior, more possible to adapt the effectiveness-oriented response strategies, and less possible to use self-oriented response strategy, than that of the managers with lower self-efficacy; (3) When the performance feedback source was from peers, the managers with highest self-efficacy and the manager with lowest self-efficacy were more possible to use the explanation strategy than that of the manager with middle self-efficacy; (4) The managers with higher performance were more possible to use the extra effort strategies, But the managers with lower performance were more possible to use the lower performance expectation strategy; (5) The strategies (such as influencing evaluation, avoidance and extra effort) were more applied in response for negative performance feedback from supervisors; (6) The primary manager was more possible to use the influencing evaluation and avoidance strategies when they received the negative performance feedback from their peers, CEO and middle-level managers more adopted an extra effort strategy when they received negative performance feedback from their supervisors.In study 4, using 264 student cadres in a university as subjects, the mechanism of 360-degree performance feedback was further analyzed by a field experiment. This research included two parts:In part 1, the agreement between different sources on evaluation was tested, The agreement between different sources was low, and the disagreement was mainly from the evaluation of teachers.In part 2, the focus of this part was the analysis of mechanism of performance feedback. The results showed: (1) The subject reduced their self-efficacy, value of the feedback-seeking behavior, the appraisal satisfaction and the improvement value of this feedback, and increased the cost of the feedback-seeking, when they received only the negative feedback;(2) 360-degree performance feedback could increase self-efficacy, induced the cost of feedback-seeking, and led to seeking morenegative feedback and less positive feedback; (3) There was an interaction among the purpose of feedback, feedback sign and feedback sources in self-efface and cost of feedback-seeking.After four researches, we found that the performance model, which put forward by Motowidlo etal (1993, 1996) and Convay (1999), could be applied in the Chinese context.