Finding out “How am I doing?” has always been a thorny issue for managers, particularly when the issue is about “How good a leader am I?”. It’s relatively easy to get feedback on results (e.g. sales, budgets etc.) but it becomes more difficult to get feedback on how we lead and manage others. Often the only feedback we get is when our boss tells us “something has gone wrong”. Or, when we do get feedback from colleagues it’s often very general and likely to be more positive. Yet, research (first carried out as long ago as 1920!) clearly shows that:
â€¢ managers who seek and get regular feedback from others are among the better performing managers.
In the last decade, research has confirmed these earlier studies and additionally found that:
â€¢ managers who are accurately aware of their strengths and weaknesses are better leaders.
How can we get some realistic feedback on our performance as managers, and more specifically our ability as leaders? The simplest way is to ask others. Some of us do that from time to time in an informal way, but the accuracy and extent of the feedback depends on many variables, not the least of which is people’s ability to receive and give honest feedback.
Some years ago, the “360 degree feedback” process was designed to overcome many of these inadequacies. It’s called “360′ because feedback is sought in a structured way from:
â€¢ Our manager
â€¢ Our peers
â€¢ The people that report to us
We also complete a “self” rating for comparison with the feedback of others. In other words, a 360 degree view of our performance.
The process involves each person (refered to as “raters”) completing a questionnaire that asks them how often do they see us exhibiting a number of common leadership behaviours on scales such as “always”, “often”, “occasionally”, “seldom” or “never”?. The more progressive 360 tools also ask each rater to add whether they would like to see us display “more” of each behaviour, the “same” amount, or “less” of each of the leadership behaviours. In this way we can gain some meaningful and useful feedback.
That all sounds well and good, but do all 360’s answer the question about “my performance as a leader”? My experience is often not. Most focus on the inputs of leadership such as character, personality, values, motives, skills or behaviours. As such, they are generally measuring what we do as “managers” not “leaders”.
What’s the difference?
Almost 100 years ago, Mary Parker Follett described a manager as “one who gets things done through people”. This description is still used by management educators and scholars today, but I believe should be changed to: “one who gets the things done that are described by the organisation in the manager’s role or position description, through the people they have been assigned”. My contention is that, if you are a manager, then: – You become a manager when you sign on for the job – You only become a leader when your people say so