Neuroscience and 360

Introduction In many companies financial year end is appraisal time. So for lots of employees we are currently in the middle of a period of what The Washington Post last month called “Corporate kabuki”. Caught up in this drama according to a CEB (advisory company) report are 85% of companies planning to makes changes to their performance review process over the next year or who have changed aspects in the past year. It seems that not many companies are happy with their current performance review process and nor are many individuals. Dr David Rock knows…

To continue reading this paper, please enter your details below

Introduction

In many companies financial year end is appraisal time. So for lots of employees we are currently in the middle of a period of what The Washington Post last month called “Corporate kabuki”. Caught up in this drama according to a CEB (advisory company) report are 85% of companies planning to makes changes to their performance review process over the next year or who have changed aspects in the past year. It seems that not many companies are happy with their current performance review process and nor are many individuals. Dr David Rock knows why. He is quoted in The Washington Post saying much as he did in the NeuroLeadership Journal article “Turn the 360 around” published in 2010:

“The state of mind created by hearing comments related to performance improvement diminish a person’s status constricting their field of view leading to a ‘restriction in creativity’.”

 I thoroughly agree with Dr Rock. I have evolved my own way of managing 360° during my 20 years of hands-on experience. In the early days, I saw how easy it was for upsets, anger, resistance and scars to emerge from the process, even when I was successfully applying so called best practice! To my horror I saw how these reactions would impact people’s careers and their working relationships – not the data per se, but the reactions to the data. I set out to develop a way where 360° could be delivered and the risks of these adverse reactions would be minimised. And my solution? It is a combination of using a robust and meaningful 360° instrument with lots of detailed specific open-text feedback together with compassionate, careful coaching by professionals trained in the “de‑personalisation” technique. I was intrigued to read the Dixon, Rock and Ochsner (2010) article to understand whether neuroscience can indicate another easier way to get consistent and positive results that empower all individuals involved.