Features of the iedex 360 feedback tool

When a consultant is seeking to run (administer) a 360 feedback process internally using the resources of an external provider it is critical that the entire system operates reliably, efficiently and securely. The system may be located at a site remote from the consultant, but they must have unfettered access to the provider's database and technical resources.

The essential requirements are summarised in the following table:

1. A simple, foolproof administration system that requires no training

The iedex 360-degree feedback tool has its own web-based admin panel that allows anyone with a standard web browser to administer and deploy a feedback program.

The system's strengths are flexibility, security, ease of use and adherence to basic web-browser standards. The feedback process has proven to be robust and simple.

Automatic warnings and reminders

In a busy environment it can be easy to overlook or forget to respond to an invitation for feedback from a colleague. The iedex system automatically sends reminders, and warns the user if a question is skipped during the feedback process.

Entirely web-based administration

The entire iedex system can be accessed using a standard browser. All aspects of the system can be accessed and managed from our web-based admin panel, including response statistics, one-click reports, reminders and group reports.

2. A clear, easy to navigate administration panel/user interface

The web-based administration panel for the iedex 360 Feedback Tool provides ease of use and one-click report generation.

3. Access to back-up service support via a help desk

To answer all your queries and assist when you get stuck.

4. An extensive database of capabilities, attributes and behaviour statements

iedex has a database of over 1,200 statements that can be used to construct the 360 feedback diagnostic. In the unlikely event that the statements in the database do not support all preferred questions, there is a "write your own statement" feature.

A tiered statement classification system that simplifies diagnostic construction

The iedex 360 feedback question database is structured on a 3-tier classification system that supports rigorous instrument design and useful aggregated feedback to participants.

For example:

This system makes constructing a questionnaire easy, by asking:

1. What capabilities do we want from our managers? (Communication, Leadership, Value role modelling, Change managements).
2. What are the most important attributes of these capabilities?
3. What behaviours would we expect to see that best demonstrate these attributes?

5. The ability to modify, replace, delete or replace questions in the diagnostic at will

We provide customised, generic and "build your own" services in 360 feedback diagnostics.

Our flexible system allows any program administrator to write their own custom questions.

Program administrators may also choose carefully pre-written, benchmarked questions from our extensive library when designing their custom feedback questionnaire.

Additionally, we have a history of expertise in advising our clients on the best ways to maximise the impact and accuracy of questions and to avoid ambiguity, iedex's 360-degree feedback online tool is a unique, time-saving method for conducting a feedback exercise using only email and the web.

6. Completely automated data handling (database, data manipulation, data analysis);

By the use of an SQL database, results are collated and stored accurately from the moment they are submitted on the easy-to-use web form.

Web-based entry, automated analysis of data and report creation means that there is no risk of error contributed by human data entry processes at any point in the iedex system.

7. Automated report generation to print ready format

Reports can be printed as soon as there are enough respondents to ensure anonymity by aggregate. Aggregation and report creation is automated to ensure data consistency and integrity.

8.Guided self assessment tool (GSAT) to assess 360 process readiness

This will assist the administrator to assess the readiness of the organisation for a 360 feedback process and help design the right content and approach

9. Ease of access to the response form

Point-and-click interface:

• Participants need only a standard web browser to access the system, invite participants and view their reports.
• Participants send invitations to their observers by email from a simple web-based form.
• All responses are collected using a simple web form.

10. A simple web response (scoring) form with written comments field

The iedex system applies 7-point scale because:

• A 5-point scale often results in response "compression" (over-use of the 2, 3 and 4) scores. Offering respondents a 7-point scale produces a more refined, detailed analysis.
• A mid point score (in this case of "4") should be available to respondents who neither agree nor disagree that the participant displays the relevant behaviour (even scales such as 4 or 6 produce inaccurate results because they do not have mid-point).

The iedex system contains the ability for all observers to provide written comments about the participant. This is a critical feature because:

• Not all feedback on the tested capabilities can be expressed perfectly in a numerical score.
• Written comments provide descriptive support or elaboration on the behaviour being assessed.

In our experience, participants often rate these comments as one of the most useful elements of feedback.

11. A guarantee of confidentiality and security

iedex has a robust quality management and confidentiality system in place. The implementation of the iedex quality system in our 360 tool ensures confidentiality in the following ways:

• Data is reported in aggregate form only. We never disclose raw scores to participants and group reports do not contain individual text comments.
  
• Comments are screened to ensure they do not unintentionally reveal the identity of a respondent.
• Scores are kept in a separate database table to questions and respondent data.
• Reports are marked as confidential regarlesss of the method of delivery.
• Access to report is available by valid password access only.
• All iedex employees are required to comply with the non-disclosure section of their employment contract and accept it as a condition of employment.
  

Maintaining confidentiality is essential if open and honest feedback is to be collected. Data is stored in a secure environment and reported only in aggregate. Special checks are in place to ensure that each respondent group has enough feedback members to ensure anonymity in feedback before a report is generated.

Password-free security

When invitations for feedback are sent, a special pass and key code are sent to the user to ensure security of the system. The advantage of the iedex system over other password-based systems is that a one-click link is employed which presents the pass and key automatically on behalf of the user, sending the browser directly to the correct, unique questionnaire.

12. A high quality, easy to use report, logically sequenced/formatted and professionally presented

Detailed reports for individuals benchmarked against the group average

Our reports contain a total of 20 sets of analysis (tables, graphs, comments fields) for every individual, all logically sequenced to ensure smooth progression through the information without the need for a debriefing facilitator (as requested by DHS).

All individual reports are benchmarked against the group average data to allow the participant to position themselves against others in the cohort.

Group reports

For management purposes, we also provide results aggregated for nominated groups of participants. This will allow the Executive to identify the general characteristics of sections, teams or branches within your organisation.

Group reports are part of the standard iedex service - there is no additional fee levied.

In the end, if the report (the outcome) does not produce an insightful, rewarding experience for the participant, the quality of the inputs doesn't really matter.

Our reports contain a total of 20 sets of analysis (tables, graphs, comments fields) for every individual, all logically sequenced to ensure smooth progression through the information. In some cases this eliminates the need for a debriefing facilitator (although a facilitator debrief is always preferable).

All individual reports are benchmarked against the group average data to allow the participant to position themselves in the cohort for each Attribute.

Analysis # 1: Capability importance (2 displays)

This report is based on the assumption that different behaviours are sometimes of different importance in different roles, at different times or for different people.

Analysis # 1 compares the "importance" scores of the manager with those of the participant for each behaviour. It allows the manager and the participant to be confident that they have the same understanding of priorities, and to discuss any disparities to reach agreement.

Only the manager and the participant complete the "importance" scores. To produce this report requires the manager and participant to complete the diagnostic twice - once for importance and once for performance.

This chart is followed by the raw importance scores provided by the manager and the participant (in a table). This greater level of detail makes for more useful discussion on specific differences of opinion about priorities.

13. Data that are benchmarked against the group average data to allow the participant to position themselves against others in the cohort

Analysis # 2: Capability performance (2 displays)

This report displays the scores the participant received for each of the Capabilities and Attributes in the diagnostic. It allows the participant to identify their strengths and weaknesses and to compare the scores given by each observer group (self, peers, manager, staff).

The report can be overlaid by a transparency of the group average data to allow the participants to position themselves in the cohort for each Capability and Attribute.

Analysis # 3: Consolidated ratings (1 display)

This Chart displays the participant's score for each dimension with the combined ratings of all other observers - the participant compared with "the rest". It gives a summary of self-perception in relation to everyone else's perception - "Is the way I see myself consistent with the way others see me?"

Analysis # 4: Table of raw performance scores (1 display)

This is the most detailed of the analyses. It contains the details of ratings provided by each observer group (self, peers, manager, staff). This analysis includes highest, lowest and average scores for each behaviour provided by staff and peers. This supports an analysis of response variance.

It enables the participant to:

• Analyse self perception versus the perception of each observer group for each behaviour.
• Set a minimum acceptable score for any behaviour, note scores below this, look for commonalities in the items noted (even though they come from different capabilities).
• Identify areas of similar feedback from different observer groups. This means they may be able to work on improving one behaviour across all observer groups.
  

Analysis # 5: Average scores ranked high to low (8 displays)

This analysis enables the participant to see the average score for each Attribute and Behaviour broken down by observer group (self, peers, manager, staff). The scores in the charts and tables are ranked from highest to lowest to give a clear picture of strengths and development needs as perceived by each observer group.

This analysis is particularly useful for 2 purposes:

• It enables participants to gain a clear picture of the type of behaviours that characterise their strengths and weaknesses. For example, many people discover they are good at "soft" skills (interpersonal communications, feedback, etc) and not at "hard" skills (planning, resourcing) or visa versa.
• It enables the identification of synergy between behaviour strengths or weaknesses. This means that working on one behaviour can have a positive impact on other related behaviours. For example, if "giving feedback", "receiving feedback" and "reviewing individual performance effectively" are all scored low, there is commonality around individual performance management skills.

13. Separate, detailed analysis and development recommendations for each observer category (manager, peers, staff)

Analysis # 6: Strengths and development needs (4 displays)

This analysis lists the top 5 average scores and 5 lowest average scores for behaviours in the diagnostic for each observer group. It enables participants to build confidence in the things they are good at and to create a development plan for the areas in which they need improvement.

A "Development Planner" is included in the report for this purpose.

Analysis # 7: Comments by observers (1 display)

This analysis lists the written comments provided by observers about the participant. It is used to "add flesh" to the numerical scores and provide supporting qualitative information. They often also provide any insights into how participants should pursue their development needs.

In our experience, participants often rate these comments as one of the most useful elements of the 360 feedback process.

Analysis # 8: Urgency barometer (1 display)

This analysis relates the data in the "importance" element of the diagnostic, to the performance data. This allows the participant to analyse, for example whether they are performing best on attributes their manager thinks are most important. Four categories of analysis are provided:

Green - you are performing above your average on these items and your manager thinks they are relatively important (apply a "continue" strategy).

Yellow - you are performing above your average on these items, but your manager thinks they are relatively unimportant (apply a "reduce focus" strategy here).

Orange - you are performing below your average on these items and your manager thinks they are relatively unimportant (apply a "continue" strategy here).

Red - you are performing below your average on these items, but your manager thinks they are relatively important (apply an "increase focus" strategy here).

Additional information in the report

In addition to the analyses identified above, the reports generated automatically and printed for participants also contain:

1. Explicit, detailed guidelines on how to read, interpret and use the report to best effect;
2. An overview of the benefits of 360 feedback processes;
3. The complete diagnostic - all Capabilities, their respective Attributes and the related behaviours.

14. Facilitator guidelines on interpreting and debriefing a report

Comprehensive guidelines on how to debrief the 360 feedback report, chart by chart