IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijhrdm/v10y2010i4p362-379.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reactions to 360° feedback: the role of trust and trust-related variables

Author

Listed:
  • Nanine Van Gennip
  • David Gijbels
  • Mien Segers
  • Harm Tillema

Abstract

One of the most significant changes within the workplace over the past decades has been the growing emphasis on the development of competencies rather than specific job skills. This change has resulted in an increased use of multiple-rater feedback systems such as 360° feedback, which is the focus of this article. The aim of this study is to provide insight into the factors that contribute to employees' perceived reactions to 360° feedback. In this study we focus specifically on a developmental use of the assessment instrument, arguing that trust mediates interpersonal variables, such as psychological safety, value diversity, and interdependence when we consider the outcome of a developmental assessment. Furthermore, conceptions of assessment and the transparency of the process of 360° feedback are expected to affect employees' reactions to assessment. Results reveal that both trust in the self and trust in the other as assessor act as mediator variables, and as such they are significant predictors of reactions to 360° feedback. Conceptions, transparency, and the interpersonal factors of psychological safety, value diversity, and interdependence in turn are predictors of trust in the self and the other.

Suggested Citation

  • Nanine Van Gennip & David Gijbels & Mien Segers & Harm Tillema, 2010. "Reactions to 360° feedback: the role of trust and trust-related variables," International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(4), pages 362-379.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijhrdm:v:10:y:2010:i:4:p:362-379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=36088
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijhrdm:v:10:y:2010:i:4:p:362-379. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=15 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.