Two Gaps Are Better Than One in 360 Degree Feedback

Amidst the array of slick 360 degree feedback technology features, the survey output is often an afterthought. Ultimately, of course, if the output doesn’t readily transfer to development actions, we’ve significantly underutilized the potential of the 360 degree assessment. We believe that dual scale surveys are essential to understanding the feedback and creating specific and targeted development plans.

Most 360 degree assessments use a single-scale – rating the extent to which the participant demonstrates the skill/behavior or some evaluation of the level at which they perform a skill/behavior.

While these instruments highlight “gaps” between rater groups, they do not indicate the relative importance of the behavior or to what extent the leader needs to perform the behavior to be successful in his/her job.

The following graphic illustrates an employee’s competency results using a single-scale, 360 degree survey instrument (i.e. rate this individual on their demonstration of behavior X.) The survey scale used by raters is as follows: 1-never, 2-rarely, 3-sometimes, 4- regularly, 5-always.

360 Degree Survey Competency Results

At a glance you can see that this employee’s direct reports (green bar) give her high marks across all three competencies – communication, results orientation, and strategic thinking. Her manager’s ratings are lower and close to her self-ratings. Peers’ ratings fluctuate a bit but are all 4.0 or better. What can you conclude?

  1. This employee’s direct reports think very highly of her.
  2. In comparison to the other rater groups, the self and manager’s scores are lower.
  3. The higher scores from direct reports and peers suggest that their needs are being met.

Now using a dual scale survey, raters are asked to what extent a behavior is currently demonstrated by this employee and to what extent the same behavior needs to be demonstrated. The following dual scale graphic illustrates the same competency results from the previous chart, but includes ratings for the needed level of performance. The gray shaded area above each colored bar represents the gap between the current and need ratings.

Competency results using the Dual Scale Difference™

Now what can you conclude with the addition of the ratings for the needed level of performance?

  1. This employee’s direct reports think very highly of her—high ratings and small gaps.
  2. Peers show large gaps between current performance and needed performance for all three competencies.
  3. Though her peers rated her higher on strategic thinking than her manager (4.36 vs. 3.43), the gap they perceive is nearly as large.
  4. While this employee’s view of her current strategic thinking performance is the same as her manager’s evaluation (3.43), her sense of needed performance in this area is far below her manager’s.
  5. The self-assessment scores indicate this employee is unaware that she needs to focus on her strategic thinking skills.

Benefits of the Dual Scale

As we’ve illustrated, single-scale assessments can lead to misinterpretation of 360 degree feedback. While they provide a look at one “gap” (i.e., between rater groups), it is not enough information to help the 360 participant create meaningful action plans. They lack the rater’s expectations and requirements of the job and so miss an important context for the ratings of current behavior.

We’ve experienced this first hand when coaching leaders using single-scale, 360 degree feedback instruments. The dual scale takes away the uncertainty that remains with the single-scale approach. For example, we’ve seen leaders receive a 3.0 (on a 5- point frequency scale) for a particular competency. The leader suggested that a 3.0 was all that was necessary or desired. With a single-scale, it is an unknown; with a dual scale, raters answered that question. The coaching discussion moved from defensiveness in action planning to focused improvement plans. The dual scale approach has these benefits:

  • Enables raters to evaluate leaders differently based on need
  • Identifies high priority competencies through the “need scale”
  • Highlights differences in job expectations by rater group and generally reveals patterns of various rater groups
  • Reflects the different levels of need for certain competencies depending upon level within the organization; e.g., senior leaders have higher “need scores” for strategy than middle managers
  • Uses a standard that is a “real” need of people you interact with on a regular basis rather than just an average (norm)
  • Clearly identifies areas to take action on by focusing on closing the gaps
  • Highlights strengths where small gaps appear

Start a Conversation

Do you have a question or comment about this article?



For additional discussion and insight on this topic and others, check out our blog:

Related Articles

Will Coaching Work? 4 Questions to Answer

Questions to help you determine if a leader should work with a coach.
Read More

9 Best Practices in 360 Degree Feedback

Managers need better feedback on their performance. A 360 degree feedback process is a very effective way to do that.
Read More

Benefits of Calibra’s 360 Degree Feedback

Calibra’s 360 Degree Feedback is different from that of other competitors in the marketplace.
Read More

360 Degree Feedback: Goals and Philosophy

The 360 Degree Feedback serves four key purposes and is based on two premises.
Read More

Two Gaps Are Better Than One in 360 Degree Feedback

Explore the benefits of using a dual scale (versus a single scale) when implementing a 360 degree feedback process.
Read More

Page History

Email These Pages to Me