Perceived credibility of 360-degree feedback & evaluation of outcome and attitudes toward behavioral change
2017-01-23T23:51:44Z (GMT) by
This study critically analyses how Perceived Credibility (PC) of a 360-degree feedback and Evaluation of Outcome (EOO) impact on ratees’ attitudes towards behavioural change. The study adopts a qualitative-dominant mixed method approach to gather the data in search for answers to the key research questions; ‘How do ratees interpret perceived credibility of 360-degree feedback? What are the top components that contribute to its perceived credibility?’ and ‘How do the intertwined permutations of positively/negatively perceived credibility and positive/negative evaluation of outcome of the behavioural change influence ratees’ attitudes toward behavioural change in real situations and hypothetical scenarios? 10 ratees were interviewed and a total of 159 respondents participated in the quantitative survey that garnered data to support and validate the qualitative findings. Through semi-structured interviews with ratees who had participated a 360-degree feedback process, explicit data was collected from both their lived real situations and in response to a set of simulated hypothetical scenarios. The strengths of the components influencing ratee’s PC of 360-degree feedback have been identified. The ratees’ attitudes toward behavioural change in different permutations of positively/negatively PC and positive/negative EOO were recorded and analysed within a framework involving force field analysis. The data collected from real situations and hypothetical scenarios was critically examined in the light of Dual Process Theory and it was found that the responses by the ratees in hypothetical scenarios were aligned with their responses in 360 degree feedback real situations and are worthy of 360 degree feedback administrators’ attention. Through in-depth analysis of the data, an attitude formation formula and a framework have been developed to explain ratees’ attitudes toward behavioural change in relation to PC, EOO, and other coefficients representing ratees’ individual differences. The formula and the framework have been validated through linear and hierarchical regression analysis based on 159 participants’ inputs and it is a key contribution to the field of 360 degree feedback studies to help administrators facilitate ratees to have positive attitudes toward behavioural change, following a 360 degree feedback. Finally, explicit suggestions are provided for 360-degree feedback administrators to effectively and successfully implement 360-degree feedback to ensure ratees would embrace positive attitudes toward behavioural change in organizations.