			Home About us Contact

Multisource Feedback (multisource + feedback)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting	40%
Medical Sciences	33%

Selected Abstracts

DOES PERFORMANCE IMPROVE FOLLOWING MULTISOURCE FEEDBACK?

PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 1 2005
A THEORETICAL MODEL, AND REVIEW OF EMPIRICAL FINDINGS, META-ANALYSIS
We review evidence showing that multisource feedback ratings are related to other measures of leadership effectiveness and that different rater sources conceptualize performance in a similar manner. We then describe a meta-analysis of 24 longitudinal studies showing that improvement in direct report, peer, and supervisor ratings over time is generally small. We present a theoretical framework and review empirical evidence suggesting performance improvement should be more likely for some feedback recipients than others. Specifically, improvement is most likely to occur when feedback indicates that change is necessary, recipients have a positive feedback orientation, perceive a need to change their behavior, react positively to the feedback, believe change is feasible, set appropriate goals to regulate their behavior, and take actions that lead to skill and performance improvement. [source]

Challenges in multisource feedback: intended and unintended outcomes

MEDICAL EDUCATION, Issue 6 2007
Joan Sargeant
Context, Multisource feedback (MSF) is a type of formative assessment intended to guide learning and performance change. However, in earlier research, some doctors questioned its validity and did not use it for improvement, raising questions about its consequential validity (i.e. its ability to produce intended outcomes related to learning and change). The purpose of this qualitative study was to increase understanding of the consequential validity of MSF by exploring how doctors used their feedback and the conditions influencing this use. Methods, We used interviews with open-ended questions. We purposefully recruited volunteer participants from 2 groups of family doctors who participated in a pilot assessment of MSF: those who received high (n = 25) and those who received average/lower (n = 44) scores. Results, Respondents included 12 in the higher- and 16 in the average/lower-scoring groups. Fifteen interpreted their feedback as positive (i.e. confirming current practice) and did not make changes. Thirteen interpreted feedback as negative in 1 or more domains (i.e. not confirming their practice and indicating need for change). Seven reported making changes. The most common changes were in patient and team communication; the least common were in clinical competence. Positive influences upon change included receiving specific feedback consistent with other sources of feedback from credible reviewers who were able to observe the subjects. These reviewers were most frequently patients. Discussion, Findings suggest circumstances that may contribute to low consequential validity of MSF for doctors. Implications for practice include enhancing procedural credibility by ensuring reviewers' ability to observe respective behaviours, enhancing feedback usefulness by increasing its specificity, and considering the use of more objective measures of clinical competence. [source]

Multisource feedback in the assessment of physician competencies

THE JOURNAL OF CONTINUING EDUCATION IN THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, Issue 1 2003
Jocelyn Lockyer PhD DirectorArticle first published online: 22 APR 200
Abstract Multisource feedback (MSF), or 360-degree employee evaluation, is a questionnaire-based assessment method in which ratees are evaluated by peers, patients, and coworkers on key performance behaviors. Although widely used in industrial settings to assess performance, the method is gaining acceptance as a quality improvement method in health systems. This article describes MSF, identifies the key aspects of MSF program design, summarizes some of the salient empirical research in medicine, and discusses possible limitations for MSF as an assessment tool in health care. In industry and in health care, experience suggests that MSF is most likely to succeed and result in changes in performance when attention is paid to structural and psychometric aspects of program design and implementation. A carefully selected steering committee ensures that the behaviors examined are appropriate, the communication package is clear, and the threats posed to individuals are minimized. The instruments that are developed must be tested to ensure that they are reliable, achieve a generalizability coefficient of Ep2 = .70, have face and content validity, and examine variance in performance ratings to understand whether ratings are attributable to how the physician performs and not to factors beyond the physician's control (e.g., gender, age, or setting). Research shows that reliable data can be generated with a reasonable number of respondents, and physicians will use the feedback to contemplate and initiate changes in practice. Performance may be affected by familiarity between rater and ratee and sociodemographic and continuing medical education characteristics; however, little of the variance in performance is explained by factors outside the physician's control. MSF is not a replacement for audit when clinical outcomes need to be assessed. However, when interpersonal, communication, professionalism, or teamwork behaviors need to be assessed and guidance given, it is one of the better tools that may be adopted and implemented to provide feedback and guide performance. [source]

Postfeedback development perceptions: Applying the theory of planned behavior

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, Issue 3 2006
Alma McCarthy
The primary purpose of management development programs is performance improvement at an individual and organizational level. Performance improvement results from knowledge, skill, or ability enhancement. An important intervention in management development is the use of 360-degree or multisource feedback (MSF), which leads to more effective career development activity resulting from enhanced self-awareness. The research model used to investigate self-reported postfeedback management development behavior is derived using the theory of planned behavior. The findings reveal that perceptions of the accuracy of MSF, cynicism, perceived organizational support, and age are significant predictors of postfeedback development behavior. The implications for research and practice are set out. [source]

Understanding and optimizing multisource feedback

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, Issue 2 2002
Leanne E. Atwater
This article integrates the most recent research results on the topic of multisource feedback with what researchers have learned over the years about performance feedback in general. We believe that this review and set of recommendations represent the state of the art at this time. We provide practitioners with new ideas about how to continue to improve the multisource feedback process in their organizations. We also suggest ideas for feedback providers and facilitators about how to maximize the success of the feedback process. Additionally, we provide "food for thought" for researchers concerning ideas for future research. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [source]

Measuring change in work behavior by means of multisource feedback

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT, Issue 2 2006
Froukje Jellema
Evaluating the effects of interventions is among the most critical issues faced by the field of human resource development today. This study addresses the potential of multisource feedback for training evaluation. The central research question is whether or not it is possible to measure change in work behavior, as a result of training, with multisource feedback in a reliable and valid way. A procedure for training evaluation was developed and three quasi-experimental studies were carried out. The psychometric properties of the multisource feedback instruments used are discussed as well as the training effects that were found. Our conclusion is that in most cases coworkers do not perceive positive changes in the work behavior of training participants. Whenever a training effect is observed, this is observed by the ratee's peers, rather than by the ratee's superiors or subordinates. Overall, the results do not support multisource feedback as an efficient method for training evaluation. However, this does not mean that multisource feedback cannot be used in a training context at all. Two alternative applications are presented. [source]

Challenges in multisource feedback: intended and unintended outcomes

DEVELOPMENT ENGAGEMENT WITHIN AND FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENTAL ASSESSMENT CENTERS: CONSIDERING FEEDBACK FAVORABILITY AND SELF,ASSESSOR AGREEMENT

PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 4 2008
SANG E. WOO
This study sought to understand employees' level of behavioral engagement in response to feedback received in developmental assessment center (DAC) programs. Hypotheses were drawn from theories of self-enhancement and self-consistency and from findings in the multisource feedback and assessment center literatures regarding recipients' perceptions of feedback. Data were gathered from 172 U.S. middle managers participating in a DAC program. Results suggested that more favorable feedback was related to higher behavioral engagement. When discrepancies between self- and assessor ratings were examined, overraters (participants whose overall self-ratings were higher than their assessor ratings) tended to show less engagement in the program compared to underraters. However, pattern agreement on the participant's dimension profile did not significantly correlate with behavioral engagement. Based on these findings, avenues for future research are presented and practical implications are discussed. [source]

CAN WORKING WITH AN EXECUTIVE COACH IMPROVE MULTISOURCE FEEDBACK RATINGS OVER TIME?

PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 1 2003
A QUASI-EXPERIMENTAL FIELD STUDY
This study examined the effects of executive coaching on multisource feedback over time. Participants were 1,361 senior managers who received multisource feedback; 404 of these senior managers worked with an executive coach (EC) to review their feedback and set goals. One year later, 1,202 senior managers (88% of the original sample) received multisource feedback from another survey. Managers who worked with an EC were more likely than other managers to set specific (rather than vague) goals (d= .16) and to solicit ideas for improvement from their supervisors (d= .36). Managers who worked with an EC improved more than other managers in terms of direct report and supervisor ratings, however, the effect size (d= .17) was small. [source]

Effectiveness of an enhanced peer assessment program: Introducing education into regulatory assessment

THE JOURNAL OF CONTINUING EDUCATION IN THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, Issue 3 2006
Elizabeth F. Wenghofer PhD
Abstract Introduction: The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario developed an enhanced peer assessment (EPA), the goal of which was to provide participating physicians educational value by helping them identify specific learning needs and aligning the assessment process with the principles of continuing education and professional development. In this article, we examine the educational value of the EPA and whether physicians will change their practice as a result of the recommendations received during the assessment. Methods: A group of 41 randomly selected physicians (23 general or family practitioners, 7 obstetrician-gynecologists, and 11 general surgeons) agreed to participate in the EPA pilot. Nine experienced peer assessors were trained in the principles of knowledge translation and the use of practice resources (tool kits) and clinical practice guidelines. The EPA was evaluated through the use of a postassessment questionnaire and focus groups. Results: The physicians felt that the EPA was fair and educationally valuable. Most focus group participants indicated that they implemented recommendations made by the assessor and made changes to some aspect of their practice. The physicians' suggestions for improvement included expanding the assessment beyond the current medical record review and interview format (eg, to include multisource feedback), having assessments occur at regular intervals (eg, every 5 to 10 years), and improving the administrative process by which physicians apply for educational credit for EPA activities. Conclusions: The EPA pilot study has demonstrated that providing detailed individualized feedback and optimizing the one-to-one interaction between assessors and physicians is a promising method for changing physician behavior. The college has started the process of aligning all its peer assessments with the principles of continuing professional development outlined in the EPA model. [source]