Premium
Other people's expectations
Author(s) -
Moses Joel,
Hollenbeck George P.,
Sorcher Melvin
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
human resource management
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.888
H-Index - 94
eISSN - 1099-050X
pISSN - 0090-4848
DOI - 10.1002/hrm.3930320207
Subject(s) - variety (cybernetics) , computer science , observer (physics) , context (archaeology) , simplicity , data collection , frame (networking) , point (geometry) , data science , psychology , artificial intelligence , sociology , epistemology , paleontology , social science , philosophy , telecommunications , physics , geometry , mathematics , quantum mechanics , biology
360‐degree Feedback is a popular fad. It relies on instruments designed to capture information from a variety of sources in the hope that the feedback from these sources can be best applied by the individual. While the idea of collecting information from a variety of relevant sources is commendable, the overall simplicity of the information collection process limits the usefulness of the information. The authors take issue with these kinds of instruments and point out why the “feedback” from 360‐degree feedback instruments is severely limited by many factors which include: (1) the reliance on generalized traits; (2) a limited or nonexistent frame of reference for making rater/observer judgments; (3) a memory‐based, often incomplete description of past performance; (4) the inability of the observer to interpret behaviors; and (5) the reliance on the instrument designer's scoring system, factor analysis, or data collection methods to interpret the information for the participant. The authors have developed instruments which differentiate between Other People's Observations (OPOs) and Other People's Expectations (OPEs). OPOs are based on context‐free assumptions. In contrast, OPEs are situation‐specific and provide both the rater and the recipient with an accurate frame of reference through which to better understand the implications of the expectations held. The article describes how the instruments were designed to capture critical leadership expectations and how this information can be applied. © 1993 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.