Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-z2ts4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-09T05:22:50.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Holding Leaders Accountable During the 360° Feedback Process

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 December 2016

Stephen F. Young*
Affiliation:
Global Research and Evaluation, Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, North Carolina
William A. Gentry
Affiliation:
Global Research and Evaluation, Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, North Carolina
Phillip W. Braddy
Affiliation:
Global Research and Evaluation, Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, North Carolina
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Stephen F. Young, Global Research and Evaluation, Center for Creative Leadership, 1 Leadership Place, Greensboro, NC 27410. E-mail: youngs@ccl.org
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

We agree with Bracken, Rose, and Church (2016) and others that a critical design feature of any 360° feedback process is accountability, where the goal is “creation of sustainable individual, group, and/or organizational change in behaviors valued by the organization” (p. 764). Though we acknowledge the important roles that the organization and raters play in holding leaders accountable for their development, the goal of our commentary is to expand on how the leader's boss and other key individuals can serve as powerful sources of accountability in the 360° feedback process and throughout a leader's development journey. We also want to note that although the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) encourages leaders to share what they have learned from their 360° feedback with their bosses and other accountability partners (e.g., peers), it is the leader's choice as to whether he or she shares key feedback with others. This practice ensures confidentiality of the data, helping leaders trust the process and increasing the likelihood that individuals accept difficult feedback and use it for performance improvement (Fleenor, Taylor, & Chappelow, 2008; King & Santana, 2010).

Information

Type
Commentaries
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2016