The Field Guide › Paper
A theoretical model, meta-analysis and review of empirical findings on whether performance improves following multisource (360 degree) feedback. Pulling together 24 longitudinal studies, the authors found that improvement in ratings over time — the entire point of the exercise — was generally small, and concluded that practitioners should not expect large, widespread performance improvement after employees receive multisource feedback. Instead of asking simply whether 360 feedback works, the paper develops a model of the conditions and individual differences (beliefs, orientations, perceived need for change) under which some people improve and others do not. Two decades on it remains the authoritative meta-analysis in the field, and the relative absence of new research since is itself notable given how widely the practice continues to be adopted. A key empirical reference for the gap between the confidence placed in 360 feedback and the evidence supporting it.