360 degree feedback - there are flaws

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF INSURANCE OFFICERS
(Affiliated to B.M.S.)

9.4.2010.

The Executive Director (Personnel),
L.I.C. of India.

Respected Madam,

Re: 360 degree feedback.

We have come across the circular ref Per/admn/ZD/200 dated 31.3.2010 regarding the above issue. This is a good step on the part of the management & we welcome it. Reverse appraisal was a much needed exercise in our Corporation. However, we have also noticed certain flaws which in our opinion, would not serve the purpose of development (a euphemism for improvement in some cases, we presume) of the senior officers. Kindly note the following:-

1. The assessee (here the SrDM) will choose his assessors. Now, the SrDM is more likely to choose the majority (or all) persons who will give a good report about him. Thus the whole purpose of self-assessment would be defeated. There should be a system of automatic random choice of assessors to make it fairer.

2. The sample size prescribed for the number of assessors is minimum 15 & maximum 25. This is a very small sample size which would enable the SrDM to handpick his assessors. A relatively bigger sample size would not only discount this possibility to handpick but it will also be a true reflection of the mood of the general employees.

3. This seems to be an exercise only in self-reflection. Even if, say, the report is bad for the SrDM, what is the guarantee that he will not ignore it & continue with his old ways? There should be some way that the management should take some deterrent action against the assessee if the general feedback is overwhelmingly bad for him.

We reiterate that on the whole the intentions of the management seem to be good in this issue. We only wish that you take cognizance of the above flaws in this system, so that the purpose is served.

Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Ganesh Kamath
GS, NOINO.