Has anyone heard of 360 peer reviews?

anamenottaken

AP007 wrote: »

my appraisals were done by my manager anyway. If you have no one that reports to you a bit of a pointless exercise.

If there are no direct reports then I don't think it could be called a 360 degree appraisal.

360 requires input from subordinates and co-workers as well as line manager. Some of course seek comments from clients too.

rds60h

anamenottaken wrote: »

360 requires input from subordinates and co-workers as well as line manager. Some of course seek comments from clients too.

What an awful word to use when describing fellow office staff or team members.
Subordinate ::
Placed in or belonging to a Lower Order or Rank.
Subservient or Inferior. Less Important; Secondary.
It is a term used in archaic Military circles and that is where it should be left.

andygb

rds60h wrote: »

What an awful word to use when describing fellow office staff or team members.
Subordinate ::
Placed in or belonging to a Lower Order or Rank.
Subservient or Inferior. Less Important; Secondary.
It is a term used in archaic Military circles and that is where it should be left.

Not really, it describes a workplace with an order of members, where one order may be in charge of others.
This is how the majority of workplaces work.

Road_Hog

What an awful load of guff 360 reviews are. We used to have them at my last company (a very well known car manufacturer).


You'd do one on your line manager (I was an area manager) and on two members of the office staff. Do anything bad on you line manager and that was your pay rise gone and some extra special treatment in the pipeline for you and not the good kind. I always used to give the office staff glowing reports, because I didn't want anyone to get a hard time.


We had other nice stuff, like a yearly corporate governance report, which was like taking an O-level exam with the number of questions. I always remember one question, do you ever do anything illegal because of your job. The answer was yes (by all the area managers), because to hit the sales targets and the size of the territory, we need to speed, otherwise we would never get around to seeing all the dealers.


Funny that, they never worried about that bit of the report.


Allsorts of other corporate rubbish over the years that went by the wayside, mission statements, outward bound management training courses, Total Quality Management (TQM), Quality At Work (QAW), having to be issued with a Filofax and told we must carry it around the office at all times and we'd wonder how we ever managed to do our job without it.


Pretty much a complete and utter contrived waste of time, thought up my some sociopath senior manager.

jobbingmusician

flashnazia wrote: »

Does that mean no questions are allowed? That doesn't sound good. Is he one of those 'you must respect my authority, don't question it/me' type? If so he needs to be aware that concept is dying in many modern workplaces.

I was worried about these questions from those he was training, as well, although I didn't think it came from an authoritarian standpoint. Rather, I thought he was finding the questions stressful, and wondered if he could ask the trainees to leave questions to the end, or even to email him after the training with any points, so that he could answer more fully when he had time, and incorporate any points arising into the next training or session. This would make people feel more valued and that their input was being used to help the company, rather than that their questions were being ignored.....

SeaLion_2

In my experience they are rubbish. The managers who give away the crown jewels get great ratings (ie break company policy to keep the staff happy) and the ones who don't do that get lower ratings. I've never worked anywhere they were implemented in the same way that the HR speak portrays them. I do not feel they are beneficial to anyone, nor to the company itself.
Unless you have a psycho in the office.....