360-degree feedback, also known as multi-rater feedback, multisource feedback, or

multisource assessment, is feedback that comes from all around an employee. "360"
refers to the 360 degrees in a circle, with an individual figuratively in the center of the
circle. Feedback is provided by subordinates, peers, and supervisors. It also includes a
self-assessment and, in some cases, feedback from external sources such as
customers and suppliers or other interested stakeholders. It may be contrasted with
"upward feedback," where managers are given feedback by their direct reports, or a
"traditional performance appraisal," where the employees are most often reviewed
only by their managers.
The results from 360-degree feedback are often used by the person receiving the
feedback to plan training and development. Results are also used by some
organizations in making administrative decisions, such as pay or promotion. When
this is the case, the 360 assessment is for evaluation purposes, and is sometimes
called a "360-degree review." However, there is a great deal of controversy as to
whether 360-degree feedback should be used exclusively for development purposes,
or should be used for appraisal purposes as well (Waldman et al., 1998). There is also
controversy regarding whether 360-degree feedback improves employee
performance, and it has even been suggested that it may decrease shareholder value
(Pfau & Kay, 2002).
Content

• 1 History
• 2 Accuracy
• 3 Results
• 4 References
History
The German Military first began gathering feedback from multiple sources in order to
evaluate performance during World War II (Fleenor & Prince, 1997). Also during this
time period, others explored the use of multi-rater feedback via the concept of T-
groups.
One of the earliest recorded uses of surveys to gather information about employees
occurred in the 1950s at Esso Research and Engineering Company (Bracken, Dalton,
Jako, McCauley, & Pollman, 1997). From there, the idea of 360-degree feedback
gained momentum, and by the 1990s most human resources and organization
development professionals understood the concept. The problem was that collecting
and collating the feedback demanded a paper-based effort including either complex
manual calculations or lengthy delays. The first led to despair on the part of
practitioners; the second to a gradual erosion of commitment by recipients.
Multi-rater feedback use steadily increased in popularity, due largely to the use of the
internet in conducting web-based surveys (Atkins & Wood, 2002). Today, studies
suggest that over one-third of U.S. companies use some type of multisource feedback
(Bracken, Timmereck, & Church, 2001a). Others claim that this estimate is closer to
90% of all Fortune 500 firms (Edwards & Ewen, 1996). In recent years, internet-based
services have become the norm, with a growing menu of useful features (e.g., multi
languages, comparative reporting, and aggregate reporting) (Bracken, Summers, &
Fleenor, 1998).
Accuracy
A study on the patterns of rater accuracy shows that length of time that a rater has
known the person being rated has the most significant effect on the accuracy of a
360-degree review. The study shows that subjects in the group “known for one to
three years” are the most accurate, followed by “known for less than one year,”
followed by “known for three to five years” and the least accurate being “known for
more than five years.” The study concludes that the most accurate ratings come from
knowing the person long enough to get past first impressions, but not so long as to
begin to generalize favorably (Eichinger, 2004).
It has been suggested that multi-rater assessments often generate conflicting
opinions, and that there may be no way to determine whose feedback is accurate
(Vinson, 1996). Studies have also indicated that self-ratings are generally significantly
higher than the ratings of others (Lublin, 1994; Yammarino & Atwater, 1993; Nowack,
1992).
Several studies (Hazucha et al., 1993; London & Wohlers, 1991; Walker & Smither,
1999) indicate that the use of 360-degree feedback helps people improve
performance. In a 5-year Walker and Smither (1999) study, no improvement in overall
ratings was found between the 1st and 2nd year, but higher scores were noted
between 2nd and 3rd and 3rd and 4th years. A study by Reilly et al. (1996) found that
performance increased between the 1st and 2nd administrations, and sustained this
improvement 2 years later. Additional studies show that 360 feedback may be
predictive of future performance (Maylett & Riboldi, 2007).
Some authors maintain that 360 processes are much too complex to make blanket
generalizations about their effectiveness (Bracken, Timmreck, Fleenor, & Summers,
2001b; Smither, London, & Reilly, 2005). Smither et al. (2005) suggest, "We
therefore think that it is time for researchers and practitioners to ask, 'Under what
conditions and for whom is multisource feedback likely to be beneficial?' (rather than
asking 'Does multisource feedback work?') (p. 60)." Their meta-analysis of 24
longitudinal studies looks at individual and organizational moderators that point to
many potential determinants of behavior change, including positive feedback
orientation, positive reactions to feedback, goal setting, and taking action.
Bracken et al. (2001b) and Bracken and Timmreck (2001) focus on process features
that are likely to also have major effects in creating behavior change and offer best
practices in those areas. Some of these factors have been researched and been
shown to have significant impact. Greguras and Robie (1998) document how the
number of raters used in each rater category (direct report, peer, manager) affects the
reliability of the feedback, with direct reports being the least reliable and therefore
requiring more participation. Multiple pieces of research (Bracken & Paul, 1993;
Kaiser & Kaplan, 2006; Caputo & Roch, 2009; English, Rose, & McClellan, 2009)
have demonstrated that the response scale can have a major effect on the results,
and some response scales are indeed better than others. Goldsmith and Underhill
(2001) report the powerful influence of the participant behavior of following up with
raters to discuss their results. Other potentially powerful moderators of behavior
change include how raters are selected, manager approval, instrument quality
(reliability and validity), rater training and orientation, participant training, manager
(supervisor) training, coaching, integration with HR systems, and accountability
(Bracken et al., 2001b).
Others indicate that the use of multi-rater assessment may not improve company
performance. A 2001 Watson Wyatt study found that 360-degree feedback was
associated with a 10.6 percent decrease in market value. Others claim that "there is
no data showing that [360-degree feedback] actually improves productivity, increases
retention, decreases grievances, or is superior to forced ranking and standard
performance appraisal systems. It sounds good, but there is no proof it works." (Pfau
& Kay, 2002) Similarly, Seifert, Yukl, and McDonald (2003) state that there is little
evidence that the multi-rater process results in change.
Additional studies (Maylett, 2005) found no correlation between an employee's multi-
rater assessment scores and his or her top-down performance appraisal scores
(provided by the person's supervisor), and advised that although multi-rater feedback
can be effectively used for appraisal, care should be taken in its implementation
(Maylett, 2009). This research suggests that 360-degree feedback and performance
appraisals get at different outcomes, and that both 360-degree feedback and
traditional performance appraisals should be used in evaluating overall
performance.[1]
360° Performance Evaluation
We have all seen cartoons depicting the owl that can turn his head 180 degrees to
the left and 180 degrees to the right. But in reality, an owl can only turn his head 270
degrees — not in a full circle. Full circle or not, it's still a good range of vision.
I'm sure you're wondering what this has to do with your business. But consider this. An
owl lives in a very competitive environment. If he is to be successful in his world, he
must constantly be looking for opportunities and threats. He must gather information
from all directions to get a complete read on his environment and what he must to do
to survive. In business terms, this translates to gathering input on our performance
from all points to ensure we are doing the job we want to do.
The 360-degree evaluation is a common tool in human resource management.
Simply put, it is a mechanism for evaluating someone's performance based on
feedback from everyone with whom the individual comes in contact — supervisors,
coworkers, partners, subordinates, the general public. It is a method of collecting
input from many sources in an employee's environment.
This can be a powerful tool. Each of wants to know how we're doing in our work. This
method of collecting evaluative input is an excellent source of motivation for
employees because it provides a truly honest assessment of how the employee and
her performance are viewed by a variety of constituents.
In the more traditional method of performance appraisal, supervisors meet with
employees one-to-one to discuss performance. By contrast, the 360-degree method
uses confidential input from many people who can truly respond to how an employee
performs on the job. The supervisor and employee meet to discuss the feedback
received.
This type of feedback helps employees see themselves as others see them and allows
them to seriously examine their behavior. It can reveal areas in which employees are
performing particularly well and those areas in which there is room for improvement.
It provides information of which neither the employee nor the supervisor may be
aware. Specific input allows employees to adjust their performance.
The most challenging aspect of the 360-degree evaluation is the evaluators' concern
about confidentiality. When implementing this type of evaluation, it's best to assure
other employees that what they share will remain strictly confidential. Likewise,
explain to each employee that he will be evaluated by many people, including those
who know his work best.
Typically, employees will find this methodology to be more fair. When they consider
this process as opposed to being evaluated by an individual supervisor who has
limited knowledge of what they do, they will begin to see the value in this type of
evaluation. They will conclude that the 360-degree feedback is more accurate and
equitable than other traditional approaches and puts all employees on a level playing
field.
This review process is also helpful for the supervisor. It can provide a more accurate
assessment of an employee's performance and help eliminate accusations of
favoritism. The 360-degree process provides greater objectivity. And because the
feedback is submitted anonymously, it provides a supervisor with the most unbiased
and accurate information from which to draw performance conclusions.
Most people are not able to see clearly how their performance is either enhancing the
work situation for others or detracting from it. This performance evaluation method
can help reveal these areas and allow us to improve the way we do our job, thereby
creating greater harmony and better productivity in the workplace. The 360-degree
evaluation will help employees identify their strengths so they can build on them at
the same time it addresses their skill gaps. It is a process that leads to continuous
learning, team building, growing self-confidence and improved productivity.
Sounds like a winning system, right? It can be, but your organization must be ready to
accept the change from the traditional method of employee evaluation. Your formal
and informal leaders must buy in to this idea and see the value of its adoption. Some
questions you should ask yourself include the following:
• Is your organization committed to continuous learning?
• Does your organization see the value of developing leaders in-house?
• Are you willing to make the changes necessary to do this?
• What is the level of trust in your organization? Will your culture support honest
feedback?
• Is upper level management willing to lead the way and volunteer for 360-
degree evaluation?
If you cannot answer "yes" to these and similar questions, then your organization may
not be ready for 360-degree evaluations. While this can be a powerful and positive
tool when tied to strategic goals and individual development, you might consider
doing more research on the subject before implementation.
360-Degrees of Evaluation / More companies turning to full-circle job reviews
May 05, 1997|By Ilana DeBare, Chronicle Staff Writer
Chuck Krogman had been working at Aspect Telecommunications for barely eight
months when he was scheduled for an unusual performance evaluation. His work was
going to be rated not just by his boss, but by two of his co-workers and three of his
subordinates.
Not surprisingly, Krogman was more than a little anxious.
"It was like opening up the envelope to see whether I'd passed or failed, or whether I'd
gotten into the college I wanted," recounted Krogman, a sales manager at the San
Jose high-tech firm.
Despite those initial worries, Krogman ended up an enthusiastic supporter of what is
called "360-degree assessment"-- reviews carried out not just by the boss, but by
peers and underlings as well.
Like Krogman, more and more of the corporate world is being bitten by the 360 bug.
THE 360 DEGREE TREND
Companies that once used 360 only for training elite managers are starting to apply it
throughout their workforce.
And, although only 8 percent of major companies now are using multisource
assessment, 69 percent plan to introduce it in the next three years, according to a
recent survey by the human resources consulting firm of Towers Perrin.
"This is a huge wave that's just hitting -- not only here, but all over the world," said
Tom Pawlak, a principal with Towers Perrin.
The surge of interest is partly due to the increased use of teams within the business
world -- where fellow team members often know more about each other's day-to-day
performance than the boss.
It's also a backlash against earlier management trends that rewarded people strictly
for meeting financial goals. Unlike those reviews, a 360 assessment focuses more on
how workers do their job.
AN EVALUATION YOU CAN USE
Companies using 360 say it boosts productivity by giving workers a more accurate
sense of their personal strengths and weaknesses.
"It's a wonderful sanity check for me," said Jamie Van De Ven, a manager at Intel
Corp. who uses 360-degree assessments for the 100 employees in her division. "I've
found if I invest more time (with 360) up front, I can save hundreds of hours during
the year because a person gets an evaluation that's more useful to them."
But they also acknowledge that the review, if done poorly, can create widespread
confusion and resentment.
"There's the age-old human issue of, 'Who said that about me? Was it Joe or Jim? Did
he really say that about me?' " said Van De Ven.
360-Degrees of Evaluation / More companies turning to full-circle job reviews
May 05, 1997|By Ilana DeBare, Chronicle Staff Writer
(Page 2 of 3)
Meanwhile, many personnel experts question whether 360 should be used as a basis
for raises and promotions -- or just as a tool for employee development.
MOTIVATIONAL OR PROMOTIONAL?
"Some people say, 'This is such a good process for development, why taint it by
bringing it into pay decisions?' " said Ann Ewen, president of Teams Inc., a Tempe,
Ariz., consulting firm that specializes in 360-degree feedback programs. "But we'd
argue that, if this is more accurate and more motivational, why not use it for big
decisions like promotion or pay?' "
The form of 360 programs vary widely from company to company, but here' how a
typical program might work:
-- An employee chooses several people for her evaluation. The number ranges
between six and 12, and includes people in the company who know her work well.
-- Those people fill out anonymous questionnaires and rate the employee on criteria
such as the ability to build consensus or make timely decisions.
-- The results are tabulated by computer, and the employee is given a report that
summarizes her performance.
-- She goes over the results with her manager, and puts together a long-term plan to
improve her work.
ROOTING OUT PROBLEMS
At Intel, Van De Ven recalls how 360 helped her uncover and solve a personnel
problem that might otherwise have festered for years.
"Several years ago I was overseeing an individual who was very outgoing, very vocal,"
Van De Ven said. "As his manager, I found that refreshing. But when we asked the
staff for feedback, it was almost universally negative. What I thought was positive,
they thought was monopolizing the discussion. It was a rude awakening. But as a
result, the person did tone down and became viewed as a valuable member of the
team."
Meanwhile, many employees praise 360-degree reviews.
Chuck Krogman felt his 360-degree review was more accurate than other evaluations
he had received. "I got much more honest feedback than I'd ever gotten from a one-
on-one review," he said.
And Hewlett-Packard materials manager Karen Hensey said her experience with 360
provided a kind of validation she wouldn't have received from an old- fashioned
review by her boss.
ESSENCE IS IN DESIGN
"The surprise came from the consistency of the feedback from totally unrelated
sources, particularly on my strengths," Hensey said. "I never felt I was being torn
apart. It was very constructive coaching. It was soul-searching but not touchy-feely."
Experts like Pawlak caution that, in today's rush to adopt 360-degree programs, some
companies may slap together poorly conceived efforts that could sour employees on
the review process.
For instance, if evaluations aren't completely anonymous, they can lead to finger-
pointing and office melodrama.
There's also the risk that employees will band together to give each other inflated
grades or treat the system as a game and learn how to play it.
IMPROVEMENT OR FAD?
The temptation to engage in such cheating is far greater when companies use 360 to
determine pay raises or promotions. Although some supporters say there are
statistical ways to check for cheating, others say it's best to keep 360- degree reviews
completely separate from pay decisions.
"If you just use it for development, you avoid the issue of, 'I don't want to say
something bad about my friend be-
cause it will jeopardize his raise,' " said Laura Harvell, an organizational development
staffer who is currently bringing 360 to the Bakersfield facilities of Occidental Oil and
Gas Corp.
THE SALIENT QUESTION
In the long run, the biggest question about 360 may be whether it represents a
permanent addition to the American workplace or just another passing management
fad.
"Organizations are always looking for the latest 'fix,' " observed Ewen, the 360
consultant.
"We hope this isn't just a fad. We think it's a lot more valuable than that."
In the short run, though, the salient question may be whether employees can survive
the deluge of evaluation forms that have started landing on their desks for co-
workers, subordinates, and bosses.
At Intel, all the 360-degree reviews take place in the first three months of the year.
A 'TIME SINK'
Tom Oda, an employee in Van De Ven's division, likes the process but calls it a "once-
a-year kind of time sink, like tax time."
As a manager, Van De Ven once found herself in charge of compiling and delivering
19 separate reviews, each of which involved input from eight to 10 evaluators.
"I did die," she acknowledged in jest.
"We might be going overboard in bombarding people with these surveys," added
Gabrielle Villa, a management development consultant at Hewlett-Packard who is
nonetheless a fan of the process.
"I've heard complaints that there's always a 360 in the in-box waiting to be
completed, and each one takes 40 or 45 minutes."
360 Degree Evaluation
- Delivering Feedback

Key Aspects of a 360 Degree Feedback Assessment Process

We conduct individual assessments, which includes input from 7-15 respondents

directly on the Internet. We can provide either a standardized or a customized
assessment. The standardized assessment consists of approximately 60 questions.
The assessment is conducted via the Internet and we provide you a final report with
these key features:
• Mean Average
• Gap Size Analysis
• Open Ended Questions
• Development Plan
• Customizable
• Overall Results
• Overall Importance Ratings
• Strengths by Rater Group
• Developmental Needs by Rater Group
• Strengths by Frequency of Occurrence
• Developmental Needs by Frequency
• Online Delivery
• Multiple Languages
• Coaching (optional)
Is 360 Degree Feedback Better Than Traditional Evaluations?

Studies show 360 degree feedback assessments can have a positive economic
impact when used for leader development. A study by J. Folkman showed the
relationship between turnover and leadership effectiveness. He showed effective
leaders have lower turnover of employees under them. Another study showed
performance-based assessments and development can result in a 6 standard
deviation improvement in employee performance, yielding a return on investment as
high as 700%

How does it work?

The process is simple. We provide you a secure webpage where the questions are
listed. The rated individual scores him/herself, along with their boss, and peer group.
After all scorings are received, we provide you and the rated individual a printed
report or access to a webpage listing the ratings summary.
• 7-15 people provide input on individual's performance
• Completely anonymous-Identities protected
• Internet based-Accessible from anywhere in the world
• The first step includes a self-evaluation
• Thorough and detailed reports providing improvement suggestions
• We work with you or your company to custom design the assessment or use
our standardized 360
 • We can custom design one assessment or as many individuals you desire
• Most standard 360's have between 60-100 questions
• Completed 360 includes a development guidebook
KEY USES:

360 Leadership Development: Executives, managers and supervisors can better

understand their respective strengths and areas for development.

Individual Skill Development: Members of the team give each other feedback about
personal leadership abilities, team interaction and workplace skills.

Team Development: Analyze teams by receiving input from customers and other
stakeholders.

Sales Development: Salespeople can receive feedback from their sales manager,
sales team members, support staff and customers.

View a sample 360 Survey - Direct Link

360 Survey Sample Reports

We have several types of 360 assessments available. Please contact us for a sample
report.
• 360 Leadership Assessment Survey
• Individual Development Survey
• Team Development Profile
• Sales Development Survey
• Managing Interpersonal Skills
• Managing Task-Project Skills
• Management Development Survey
• Job Satisfaction Survey

You should start planning how feedback will be delivered before you even start gathering
data. The plan should be communicated to those people who will be receiving feedback and
perhaps also to those people providing the feedback. Once you are prepared to present the
feedback results to participants, keep in mind the suggestions below.
Remember Your Purpose
Remember why you are asking employees to go through the 360 evaluation process. If your
mission is employee development, make sure feedback is provided in a confidential, non-
threatening manner. If participants feel threatened by getting feedback, they will be less
open to receiving it.
Assuming your 360 evaluation program is focused on development, do not provide feedback
in a vacuum. Consider hiring professional and neutral consultants who are experienced at
delivering 360 feedback and coaching employees to improve. If feedback is negative, it can
be demoralizing and counterproductive. Employees should have access to a neutral person
who can help them understand their feedback and create a plan for development. If
consultants are not in your budget or the scope of your project, make sure employees have a
trusted HR person available.
Do not provide feedback in a vacuum: Yes - we are repeating ourselves... Feedback can be
very demoralizing if it is negative. Often, feedback includes indications of both strengths and
weaknesses, and it is easy for a recipient to focus on the negative, even if he or she is
generally doing a good job. A professional coach or HR representative can help employees
identify their strengths & weaknesses and create a development plan that helps the
employee become more effective.
Create a development plan: The 360 evaluation process and feedback should lead to
developmental goals. These goals should be tailored to each participant, and they need to fit
with your organization's vision, mission, and strategy. Remember that developmental goals
need to be measurable and achievable. Ideally, a participant should focus on about 3 to 5
goals in key areas that need improvement. Be sure you have a process in place to hold
people accountable for achieving their goals.
Follow up! How are you going to know if your 360 program is working if you do not follow
up? Plan to follow up with another round of feedback anywhere from 6 to 12 months after
the initial feedback is collected. This is the only way you will be able to see if employees are
benefiting from the feedback they received. Also, be sure to communicate to participants
that they will be getting follow-up feedback. This will help create a sense of accountability. In
order to ease the burden on respondents, you might want to consider an abbreviated version
of the original 360 for the follow-up feedback that focuses on those competencies related to
the participant's developmental goals.
Ready to Launch? Double check that you have thought through the entire process before
you start collecting feedback. Careful planning and communication are essential to a
successful 360 evaluation program. Timely delivery of the data is also important, so do not
wait until the data are in to think about what you are going to do with them.
360 GRADOS

Tiene un alto nivel de energía física en el trabajo

Aparece seguro de sí mismo y rara vez busca alabanza o reforzamiento.

Se comunica de manera clara y persuasiva

Puede percibir los sentimientos de otros y responde a ellos apropiadamente.

Ve el cambio como una oportunidad y no como una amenaza.

Está consciente de sus áreas de oportunidad.

Es un solucionador de problemas eficaz

Piensa las cosas cuidadosamente y a fondo antes de tomar decisiones

Es puntual al asistir a las reuniones y compromisos.

Hace una cosa a la vez y evita dispersarse en muchas tareas.

Es lúdico en el trabajo.

Efectúa decisiones basadas en valores que reflejan una visión bien definida.

Es una persona íntegra.

Es comprometido.

Toma descansos regularmente durante su día de trabajo

Se ve confortable con él mismo o ella misma.

Expresa sentimientos de aprecio, calidez y cuidado

Demuestra un alto nivel de interés en lo que respecta a otros.

Tiene buena resistencia a la presión.

Es atento a sus sentimientos y afectos por los otros.

Tiene la capacidad para pensar clara y lógicamente bajo presión

Parece ser organizado y prepararse mentalmente para su trabajo cada día.

Controla bien su tiempo

Se mantiene orientado a sus prioridades

Muestra creatividad en el trabajo.

Comunica un fuerte sentido de propósito en su vida.

Es una persona en quien se puede confiar.

Va más allá del llamado del deber para asegurar el buen logro de un proyecto.

Usa la autocrítica con sentido del humor para romper la tensión y hacer a los demás la vida
confortable.

Está dispuesto a tomar riesgos

Escucha bien.

Se disculpa y reconstruye las relaciones cuando él mismo ha creado la ruptura o el aislamiento.

No exagera sus reacciones o “catastrofiza”.

Consistentemente refleja un alto grado de autoconciencia.

Afronta completamente los hechos.

No es apresurado o frenético.

Puede mantener la atención por largos períodos

Tiene una curiosidad contagiosa sobre las cosas.



Comunica un sentido claro de visión y de una misión fuerte en el trabajo.

Tiene el valor de sostener sus convicciones.

Persevera incluso cuando enfrenta obstáculos y reveses.

Es diligente al buscar periódicamente descanso, recuperación y renovación en épocas de gran

tensión.

Parece físicamente en forma.

Acepta la crítica y la retroalimentación agradecido y no a la defensiva.

No suele juzgar a los demás

Es capaz de salir de su camino para ayudar a otros.

Comunica con optimismo y confianza.

Es honesto consigo mismo, incluso cuando eso le resulte difícil.

Esta mentalmente alerta y atento en el trabajo.

Maneja su tiempo eficientemente en el trabajo.

No se distrae con facilidad.

Disfruta y estimula a los demás para pensar en forma novedosa y tener nuevas ideas.

Se conduce más por una visión interna que por presiones externas

Da la cara por aquello en lo que cree.

Está dispuesto a comprometer el tiempo que sea necesario para que el trabajo quede bien hecho.

Transmite sentimientos de satisfacción profunda y gozo en su vida.

Maneja los conflictos en forma efectiva.

Considera las necesidades de los demás en sus acciones.

En el trabajo es optimista y orientado a soluciones, más que crítico y quejumbroso.

Regularmente toma tiempo para reflexionar y autoexaminarse.



Tiene la capacidad de pensar en forma clara y lógica en el trabajo, incluso en condiciones de alta
demanda.

Es capaz de concentrarse y enfocarse en el trabajo.

Puede pensar de forma distinta, fuera de lo convencional.

Se rige por un conjunto claro de principios y creencias, y éstos guían sus acciones.

Le apasiona su trabajo.

Realiza ejercicio durante la jornada.

En el trabajo parece confiado y seguro.

Muestra respeto hacia los demás al expresarse.

En el trabajo siente más reto y oportunidades que frustraciones e irritaciones.

Las acciones que toma en su trabajo son congruentes con sus valores más profundos.

Da la impresión de que su trabajo le genera satisfacción personal.

Parece divertirse en el trabajo.

Parece estar feliz y satisfecho en el trabajo.

Tiene un estilo colaborativo (comparte planes, información y recursos)

Tiene un alto nivel emocional positivo en el trabajo.

Toma vacaciones regularmente a lo largo del año.

Muestra humildad genuina.

Deja de lado sus intereses personales a favor del equipo o del mayor beneficio para todos.

Frente a los desafíos responde apropiadamente.

Cuando está trabajando parece estar completamente involucrado en sus labores.

Puede estar enfocado en los demás, en lugar de centrarse únicamente en él/ella.

Mantiene una buena relación con su jefe

Transmite valoración y gratitud por lo que tiene.

Mantiene buenas relaciones con sus compañeros.



Mantiene un sentido de perspectiva ante la presión.

Crea y sostiene relaciones cálidas, profundas y auténticas en el trabajo.

Reta y entusiasma, más que amenazar a otros.

Elogia a los demás con frecuencia.

Su temperamento es estable, más que voluble..

Es confiado, más que desconfiado.

Es asertivo, más que pasivo

Es relajado, más que ansioso.

Enfrenta el conflicto, más que evadirlo.

¿Qué le sugerirías a esta persona que cambiara a fin de que tuviera una mayor eficiencia en el
trabajo?

¿Cuál consideras que sea el mayor obstáculo personal que tiene esta persona y que le impide un
mayor compromiso e involucramiento en su trabajo?

¿Si tuvieras que definir el área ciega más importante que tiene esta persona y que le impide tener
mayor efectividad en el trabajo, cuál sería?