Keep knowledgeable with free updates
Merely signal as much as the Funding Banking myFT Digest — delivered on to your inbox.
As year-end approaches, funding banks embark on one in all their most hallowed (and sometimes groaned-about) traditions: the 360-degree efficiency overview. The method gathers suggestions from all ranges — managers, friends, and juniors — to achieve a complete view.
In principle, it guarantees a good and holistic analysis. In follow, nevertheless, this ritual tends to elicit extra scepticism than assist.
The idea sounds nice on paper. Nameless opinions from a cross-section of colleagues ought to provide a balanced, crowdsourced evaluation of efficiency. However for all of the speak of objectivity, the 360-degree overview is commonly much less about constructive suggestions and extra about workplace politics. With out cautious design and oversight, it dangers morphing right into a platform for hijinks the place gaming the system can overshadow evaluation.
Right here’s how 360-degree opinions work: Staff obtain numerical scores based mostly on solutions by their colleagues to a web based survey of sometimes 50 questions. The topic is then force-ranked in opposition to their friends. The lengthy questionnaire goals to seize a variety of metrics, from dealmaking mojo to teamwork and sense of urgency.
Nonetheless, the system is weak to manipulation. Some bankers, removed from viewing the 360 system as a chance for private development, see it as a platform for self-promotion. The methods used to sport the system are as diversified as they’re intelligent, with establishments continuously attempting to remain a step forward. It’s the efficiency overview model of Whac-A-Mole: shut one loophole and one other pops up. The result’s a endless cat-and-mouse sport between staff attempting to spice up their scores, and banks attempting to maintain the method credible.
One of many oldest tips within the e book entails reviewer choice. At some companies, staff can handpick their reviewers, which opens the door to mutually helpful quid professional quo preparations. You lavish hyperbolic reward in your workplace buddy who duly returns the favour. To counteract this, some banks have turned to manager-selected reviewers, hoping for extra goal suggestions. Whether or not it really works is one other story.
One other contentious characteristic entails unsolicited opinions. Some establishments enable staff to submit suggestions even when they weren’t chosen as reviewers, theoretically to incorporate a broader spectrum of enter past only a curated group of allies. In follow, although, this will develop into a strategy to quietly torpedo a rival. Some companies have finished away with unsolicited opinions altogether, figuring that fewer alternatives to sabotage a colleague can solely be a very good factor.
The challenges transcend gamesmanship. The factors utilized in 360-degree opinions are sometimes a hodgepodge of metrics, combining quantifiable measurements like income technology with squishier ideas like teamwork and appearing as “culture-carrier.” These are legitimate factors to measure, however the combine can result in a complicated mishmash of outcomes which might be tough to interpret persistently.
Banks aren’t blind to the shortcomings and shenanigans. Many have tinkered with varied modifications, similar to filtering out excessive rankings (each overly beneficiant and overly harsh) to scale back knowledge distortion. In actual fact, most leaders deal with the scores as a intestine test greater than gospel, a strategy to verify what they already suspect. In the case of choices on promotions and bonuses, managers nonetheless lean closely on their very own observations and trusted lieutenants.
For a lot of managers, essentially the most eye-opening a part of the 360-degree overview is commonly the free-text remark part, the place nameless suggestions can provide genuinely useful — and brutally sincere — criticism. However very similar to the overview scores, these feedback will be weaponised, with anonymity giving cowl for settling previous scores or undermining workplace rivals.
And typically the remarks are trollishly unserious: a number of years in the past, one colleague used the 360 type to criticise me for “persistently skipping leg day on the health club.” I had no drawback determining who the (libellous) joker was!
The query is whether or not the business ought to rethink its strategy to efficiency opinions. The present system consumes numerous time and assets and arguably obscures greater than it illuminates.
One thought is to ditch the annual ritual altogether in favour of steady suggestions all year long, even when this piles on extra of a burden on administration. One other resolution could be to discover team-based evaluations to encourage collaboration. And will AI-driven evaluation be used to sift by way of suggestions patterns and flag flagrant examples of back-scratching and back-stabbing?
For now, the 360-degree overview stays a curious mixture of suggestions, mischief, and gamesmanship. Success on this system typically displays a banker’s political acumen as a lot as their skilled competence. Perhaps that’s the attraction in spite of everything.
