st century 360: using feedback data to unlock your team’s ... … · the lack of utilization of...
TRANSCRIPT
Talent Development
The 21st
Century 360: Using Feedback
Data to Unlock Your Team’s Talent
Executive Guide to Optimizing 360 Degree Feedback in Talent Development
Jasper Lin, M.H.A. Senior Analyst 202-568-7997 [email protected] Brendan McGinty, M.B.A. Practice Manager 202-266-5785 [email protected]
2445 M Street NW | Washington DC 20037 | P 202.266.5600 | F 202.266.5700 | advisory.com
2
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
Table of Contents
The Imperative for Leadership in Health Care ........................................... 4
Multisource Feedback in Health Care Talent Development ...................... 5
360s and the Sad Reality of Limited Aspirations ...................................... 6
Best Practices in Multisource Assessments ............................................. 8
A Better Way to Support Individual Development .................................... 9
Development PLUS Leadership Deployment ......................................... 11
3
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
43%
25%
35%
OperatingMargin
PatientSatisfaction
All Initiatives
The Imperative for Leadership in Health Care
It’s no secret: health care organizations face the intractable need to lower costs and improve the quality of care. It also comes as no surprise, then, that leadership determines whether a successful transformation takes place among health care institutions. Unfortunately, health care leaders have consistently struggled in improving their organizations. Research shows that only 35% of all improvement initiatives at hospitals meet their targets1; a subsequent survey conducted with 163 CEOs, senior strategic managers, and other professionals revealed that improvement initiatives fail due to factors attributed to poor leadership.2
Percentage of Initiatives Achieving Improvement & Root Causes for Failure
These studies capture health care organizations’ immediate imperative to prioritize and revamp leadership development. New challenges require new ways of doing business—equally the case for new approaches to leadership and talent development.
1 Advisory Board Research and Analysis
2 “The Powerful Convergence of Strategy, Leadership and Communications: Getting it Right,” Forbes Insights, accessed October 18, 2012,
http://www.forbes.com/forbesinsights/FDStrategy/index.html
100% Success
Leadership failures creating a massive performance gap
Poor Execution: 16%
Lack of Accountability: 13%
Wrong Strategy: 18%
Insufficient
Analysis: 21%
External Circumstances: 24%
Root Causes of Failed
Improvement Initiatives
Human capital holds back organizational
performance
4
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
Multisource Feedback in Health Care Talent Development
As part of multiple efforts to strengthen leadership capacity, 360-degree feedback (also known as multisource feedback) has proliferated as a common tool for many corporations to measure and plan for the development of leadership competencies. In the past two decades, up to 25 percent of U.S. employers and a majority (approximately 90 percent) of Fortune 1000 companies have adopted a 360-degree tool.3 A recent survey conducted by the Institute for Corporate Productivity further supports the notion of 360s’ use, particularly compared to other tools, and particularly at high-performing companies.4
Cross-Industry Adoption Rate of Development Tools
360-Degree Assessment
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
Measuring Effectiveness
Listen to Candidate Feedback
High Performers 50% 17% 23% 75%
Low Performers 28% 20% 19% 25%
The table above suggests a correlation between the performance of an organization and the utilization of 360 feedback with organizational support and follow-up, though causation and effect cannot be equally assumed.
Health care, however, lags behind other industries in the adoption of 360 degree surveys: a study in 2007 indicate that only a small proportion of health care leaders use 360 feedback a “great deal” of the time.5 The chart below illustrates this trend.
The lack of utilization of 360 feedback in health care as compared to high performers in other industries may point to unique adoption barriers among health care staff and the potential for increased improvement through health care’s use of the 360.
3 Anonini D, Park H. “The relationship between rater effect and three sources of 360-degree feedback ratings”. J. Manage. 2001:27:479-495.
4 “Leadership Assessment and Development Survey”, Institute for Corporate Productivity, 2001.
5 “National Healthcare Leadership Survey: Implementation of Leadership Development Best Practices”, National Center for Healthcare Leadership, accessed October 15
th, 2012,
http://nchl.org/Documents/Ctrl_Hyperlink/doccopy5321_uid7282011150092.pdf
18% 13%
6%
50%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Health CareAdministrators
NursingLeaders
MedicalLeaders
HighPerformers (All
Industries)
Adoption of 360 Assessments in Health Care
High performers more likely to use
360 tools
Health care leaders less likely to benefit from
360 process
5
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
360s and the Sad Reality of Limited Aspirations
Perhaps, the limited use of 360s in health care is wholly consistent with the limited value that many organizations derive from the tool. Health care leaders would be correct to question whether the prevalence of the 360 warrants its unfiltered use in leadership development, as research suggests modest effectiveness for the 360 in improving performance in many cases.
Moreover, another meta-analysis fully specific to 360s supported the fact that 360 feedback interventions in general had limited effect as “it is unrealistic for practitioners to expect large across-the-board performance improvement after people receive multi-source feedback.”6
Although these studies only suggest modest effectiveness of 360s, a more thorough review of the literature reveals untapped potential. Previous studies discounting the effectiveness of the 360 do not control for myriad factors that can contribute to such results. The design of individual 360s varies on a wide spectrum from vendor to vendor, and different organizations elect different approaches in supporting the feedback process. 360 design, use, and support all vary greatly across organizations.
These 360 variations reveal multiple pitfalls that may hinder their effectiveness. Together, these pitfalls undercut the ability of 360s to develop staff but instead render 360s as another administrative hassle that competes with valuable time and human resources. Three pitfalls contribute to the limited efficiencies of 360s:
Pitfall #1: Poor Accountability7
In many 360s designed for development tools, participants receive their feedback and ultimately lack a motivation for change. This undesired outcome often results from the following conditions:
Minimal Behavior Change - 360s rarely “hold ratees accountable for using the
feedback to change their behavior”8
Ambiguous Game Plan - 360s often lack concrete steps and timelines for further
practice following the 360 feedback
The lack of accountability in many 360s mutes their potential for change. Participants may recognize areas they need work on, but lack proper opportunities and reminders to act on their weaknesses.
6 Smither, J.W., M. London and R.R. Reilly. 2005. “Does Performance Improve following Multi-source Feedback? A Theoretical Model, Meta-Analysis and Review of Empirical Findings.”
Personnel Psychology 58:33-66. 7 Leanne E. Atwater, Joan F. Brett, and Atira Cherise Charles. “Multisource Feedback: Lessons Learned And Implications For Practice”, Human Resource Management, Summer 2007, Vol.
46, No.2, Pp. 285-307. 8 Carlson, Margaret S., “360-Degree Feedback: The Power of Multiple Perspectives”, Popular Government, Winter 1998
Feedback Intervention Meta-analysis on 607 effect sizes, 23,663 observations “On average, feedback intervention has a moderate positive effect on performance. However, over 38% of the effects were negative.”
Kluger, A.N. and A. DeNisi, “The Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention
Theory”, 1996. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 119, No.2, 254-284
360 design elements drive success—or
failure
6
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
Pitfall #2: Poor Development Planning and Timing for 360s9
As many improvement initiatives fail due to leadership in development planning, 360 implementations often fail because of these similar factors:
Improper Context - Organizations often neglect to consider the appropriate context
for 360s to be implemented and sometimes elect to execute 360s when the organization is not ready to embrace changes in development
o One study indicates that “organizations considering serious restructuring or downsizing are not in a good position to begin implementing” 360s
Cynical Culture - Organizations experiencing a pervasive culture of cynicism are
equally not suitable for 360s o Another study found that participants who expressed cynicism to
organizational initiatives were less likely than other participants to change for the better
Pitfall #3: 360s Used for Promotional and Punitive Purposes10
Organizations often combine the use of 360s with traditional appraisal systems to help determine compensation and punitive consequences. Utilizing 360s for appraisal purposes rather than development purposes yield several disadvantages:
Wrong Focus - Recipients and raters of 360s under a performance appraisal system
will lose focus for developing their leadership competencies
Biased Ratings - 360s participants may attempt to ensure that reflected 360s ratings
will be “largely positive (or at least balanced) and will serve their interests as well as the organization’s”, will not ruffle any feathers, or will exact punishment based on personal motivations
Inappropriate Metric - Furthermore, 360 competencies are not equivalent to
individual accomplished objectives, the metric most often used for reward and punitive decisions. They instead highlight the necessary mindsets that precede task accomplishment.
Best Practices in Multisource Assessments
In addition to avoiding the common pitfalls many organizations erroneously commit to, health care organizations can further success by following research11 for 360s that incorporate three success factors into their design.
Success Factor #1: Facilitation
Facilitation typically occurs in a workshop setting with participants and a facilitator after the evaluation of 360s. Facilitation includes the following elements and benefits:
Clarity - The facilitator explains the process and purpose of 360s to participants and
subsequently clarifies questions raised in the workshop
Guidance - Participants can receive guidance on the interpretation of 360s results
and leave facilitation sessions with a greater understanding of how feedback relate to their day-to-day work Several research studies underscore these points:
9 Leanne E. Atwater, Joan F. Brett, and Atira Cherise Charles. “Multisource Feedback: Lessons Learned And Implications For Practice”, Human Resource Management, Summer 2007, Vol.
46, No.2, Pp. 285-307. 10
Lepsinger, R., Lucia, AD., “360 Degree Feedback and Performance Appraisal”, Training, Vol. 35 Issue 9, P62 11
Leanne E. Atwater, Joan F. Brett, and Atira Cherise Charles. “Multisource Feedback: Lessons Learned And Implications For Practice”, Human Resource Management, Summer 2007, Vol.
46, No.2, Pp. 285-307.
360s for development not for
appraisal
7
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
Study Description Study Results
Study compared effects of performance between groups that received facilitation post 360s and groups without facilitation
Results pointed to a statistically significant improvement for groups that received facilitation
Study compared companies on meeting pre-established objectives between groups that received facilitation post 360s and groups without facilitation
Results showed that all companies that chose not to facilitate 360s failed to meet their pre-established objectives
Success Factor #2: Coaching
Coaching is often executed through one-on-one meetings between a mentor and a participant following the 360. In addition to explaining and interpreting the results of participants’ feedback, coaching composes of these processes and are supported by the following studies:
Planning - Coaches aid participants in the process of forming their individual
development plans and identifying concrete goals to improve upon their competencies
Troubleshooting - Coaches also provide continual troubleshooting support for
participants as they work towards pre-set goals Several research studies highlight these concepts as well:
Study Description Study Results
Study explored effects of executive coaching for 360 participants
Executive coaching improved participants’ ability to set specific goals, solicit ideas for improvement from supervisors, and resulted in better ratings overall
Study explored willingness to accept 360 feedback
Coaching aids participants to more willingly accept feedbacks’ accuracy and usefulness by limiting negative emotions
Study explored benefits of 360 coaching
“managers who worked with a coach were more likely to improve in self-awareness, employee satisfaction, commitment and intention to quit”
Success Factor #3: Alignment
Change management of any scale often meets resistance. 360s are likewise not exempt from resistance and ambivalence among the feedback participants. To ensure buy-in to the feedback process, alignment comes in the following forms:
Communication - Organizational leaders must communicate clearly to staff how
360s fit in and adds to existing organizational visions and goals
Integration - Research suggest the need for organizations to integrate the 360 with
other development options, performance appraisal, and training as examples of “clear and careful implementation strategies with 360 feedback”
Full Support - The key for organizational executives is to fully support 360 efforts
and allow participants to adopt the 360 as a legitimate development tool for the organization
When these three success factors are implemented in concert, organizations show their participants that management is dedicated in providing a complete package of 360s that extend beyond simple reflection and build upon practical and useful daily work support.
360s more effective with facilitation and
coaching
8
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
A Better Way to Support Individual Development Planning
The Advisory Board pays careful attention to this research in its approach to 360s, from the design of the tool to the process of creating individual development plans (IDPs). Foundational elements of the Advisory Board’s 360 PLUS assessment are comparable to many tools, but also include crucial elements of difference:
Targeted
Competency Model Comprehensive
Feedback Approach
Prioritized Individual Action Planning
Workshop
Conventional Service
9-18 competencies Feedback from distinct sources combined into single report
Tool for individual development plans
Advisory Board Approach
15 health care competencies, PLUS competencies comprise 54 observable behaviors12
Competencies rated for both current performance PLUS future importance
Three distinct reports—supervisors, peers, and direct reports—PLUS congruency to self-report
On-site, faculty-led debrief PLUS development planning
Within the Advisory Board 360 PLUS, rated leaders are not rated on each competency. Instead, raters assess observable behaviors for the leaders that in turn translate to each competency. For example, for the competency of Financial Acumen, observable behaviors include:
Ability to use core financial concepts (ROI, capital budgeting, financial ratios) when planning and making decisions
Closely monitors ongoing financial performance in area of oversight
For the competency of Communicating Effectively, observable behaviors include:
Expresses ideas clearly, succinctly, and logically
Informs staff about pertinent issues in a timely manner
Health care organizations engaged with the 360 PLUS also have the option to add three custom competencies to their reports to accurately capture the needs and priorities of each organization.
The Targeted Competency Model
12
The Advisory Board Company competency model, or competency “wheel”, was developed with extensive input from hospital executives, hospital educators, and leadership development
experts. These competencies are critical to leadership in health care.
The power of three distinct
reports
Providing focus to 360 plans for
real progress
9
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
After receiving ratings from supervisors, peers, and direct reports, each individual’s competencies are then mapped onto the framework below. First, individuals are encouraged to focus on the top half of the competency map–the skills deemed most important. On the other hand, they set aside competencies in the lower half of the map due to their lack of importance to the organization. Individuals can shift their limited development efforts away from less important competencies, barring a dramatic shift in organizational strategy and direction that changes their priority.
When guiding participants and organizations on the most efficient way to develop and train leaders, the 360 PLUS uses a selective strategy in choosing the competencies to improve upon. For individuals, competencies that lie in the zone of compensate, develop, and leverage are of particular interest due to high future importance:
Leverage – Individuals are encouraged to utilize their strengths for the organization in
these competencies through new and expanded roles, such as coaching or training
Develop - The Advisory Board recommends spending the bulk of time and resources
to improving individual competencies in the develop section, as research13 indicates that leaders who receive copious amount of training and support in improving competencies receive limited growth after reaching a certain performance plateau
Compensate - Individuals must understand their weaknesses, find new partners and
methods to support their competencies that need to be compensated, and discuss with their managers how they can better allocate their time and resources away from roles requiring these competencies
13
“Return on Leadership-Competencies that Generate Growth”, McKinsey & Company, accessed October 24th, 2012,
http://www.mckinsey.de/downloads/kompetenz/organization/Return%20on%20Leadership.pdf
Compensate Develop Leverage
Most Important
Future Importance
Least Important
Weakest Strongest Current Performance
Creating a Development Plan
Set Aside
10
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
Development PLUS Leadership Deployment
Beyond these core individual elements, however, organizations have the opportunity to direct the data generated within the feedback process for much greater returns. The concept of “leadership deployment” can accelerate the senior executive team’s efforts to build the management team they need to address looming challenges. A strategy of “development PLUS deployment” is the next level of sophistication in 360s. 360s allow health care executives to see their current leadership talent and suggest the best ways to develop and utilize their skills. In the table below are several best practices in “powerhouse” talent management that stem from 360 feedback data. Most hospitals are not using all of these practices, and unfortunately, none appear to be using all of them.
Talent Best Practice Description Self-Test
Moneyball leadership deployment
Coaching matchups based on real skill data
Are we spending too much time trying to cover up our basic weaknesses?
Leadership SWAT teams
Ongoing roster of leadership assets
When a special project arises, do I know already who has the special skills to drive the initiative?
Hi-po focused succession plans
Identified high-potentials, with targeted training interventions for each
Do I know my future senior execs—and do I know what could derail each one?
“HD” leadership roles sculpted to the individual
Personalized leadership roles based on individual strengths and weaknesses
Have I ever redrafted a leader’s role with legitimate changes to responsibilities?
Laser-focused mentorship pairings
Relentless discipline of developing most crucial leadership competencies for each leader
Do my leaders have mentors based on specific leadership skills?
Extreme-ROI expert catalog
Surfacing the truly extraordinary on specific skills
Do I know who the absolute peak leader is for any given leadership skill?
Talent deficit reduction Targeting revealed weaknesses across the leadership group
Are we making leadership investments based on assumptions—or actual information?
Using any combination of the best practices shown above, organizations can match leaders in need of developing or compensating their competencies with other leaders within the organization who excel at these same competencies and can leverage their strength for the betterment of their colleagues. Below are two detailed examples highlighting the utility of 360s:
Leadership deployment the next generation
of 360 utilization
11
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
Hi-Po Focused Succession Plan Report
High-Potential—Leader with Several Peak
Competencies
Peak Competencies (in top 10% for each competency)
Red Flag Competencies (bottom 50% in each
competency)
Joe Crump
Service Orientation and Customer Focus
Identifying and Recruiting Talent
Constructive Thinking Financial Acumen
Process Management
Prioritizing and Delegating
Giving Feedback
Upward Management
The executive team of each organization can utilize the above report for two purposes. First, leadership can use the report in conjunction with available appraisal reviews to help identify leaders appropriate for future succession. This report also allows leadership to collaborate with high-potential individuals in developing and taking more responsibilities in roles related to their peak competencies. They should also be aware of participants’ red flag competencies and reflect on ways to compensate or job-sculpt for these competencies.
Extreme-ROI Expert Catalog
Competency Top 3 Experts
Communicating Effectively Elliot Parker Jane Warren Jay Bradley
Giving Feedback Jordan Smith Susan Summers Jennifer Taylor
Identifying and Recruiting Talent Isabelle Milner Emily Johnson Madlyn Peyton
Developing and Retaining Talent Jeanie Morgan Christian Thompson Mallory Clark
Building and Strengthening Relationships Malinda Bryan Melvin Cordova Damian Friedel
Executive teams at each institution can also use the ROI catalog report to great effect. When seeking to find a suitable individual to spearhead a project, leadership can use the catalog to quickly locate possible candidates. The report also can be useful when seeking to form teams for an ad-hoc assignment. In this case, leadership can mix and match the most appropriate individuals as to leverage their respective strengths in a collaborative setting.
Organizations can further push the development process by selecting individuals in need of improvement and equipping them with new instruction and training on the competencies they need to nurture. Previously untapped for individuals, competencies rated as lower importance can even be used for job sculpting in ensuring that each individual’s strengths are applied to their daily work.
360 deployment reports key to identifying support for initiatives
12
© 2012 THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY ADVISORY.COM
Ultimately, health care executives can use the 360 PLUS in the following ways:
Personalized development pathways for individuals
Clarity for supervisors to best help support these individuals
Sense of overall leadership assets to deploy against coaching and special initiatives
The Advisory Board’s 360 PLUS assessment has incorporated these elements to allow health executives to better guide their leadership development with a dashboard of leadership potential.
The business of health care is marked by layers of complexities. In this environment, a 360 assessment can be a valuable process when designed with the proper elements of facilitation, coaching, and alignment to organizational strategy. Ultimately, a “PLUS” approach to the 360 can enable organizational leaders to actively leverage their leadership assets for maximum leadership strength.
For more information, contact:
A new 360 approach for collective
capacity