The measurable skill of the average director receiving Clark Wilson Group 360 feedback is up. We recently conducted the biennial norm update for all fourteen Task Cycle® surveys, adding more than 300,000 records to our database. We found the average perceived skill at manager and director levels has increased again by as much as 4%. This continues a trend we began to observe about 15 years ago. The only group that had a noticeable decline in skill ratings by others is executives!
In 360 feedback, the recipient rates him or herself on the same feedback questionnaire as his or her manager, peers, subordinates, and sometimes customers. Wilson surveys are based on the validated Task Cycle, a logical, sequenced, six-step approach to overall effectiveness.
Management-level feedback received through the Survey of Management Practices stayed about the same, not moving significantly since the mid-1990s.
Director-level feedback, received through the Survey of Leadership Practices, moved up from all perspectives. Managers of director-level personnel increased their opinions of their director-subordinates by 4% over the past five years. It may not sound like much, but in the world of large populations and long-term data collection, it is. Peers and direct reports of directors boosted their opinions by 2% - 3%. Even the directors gave themselves a 1% - 2% boost. This continues a positive trend we’ve seen over fifteen years.
Executive-level feedback recipients increased their self-appraisal over the past five years by 1% - 2%, but did not fare so well in others’ feedback from the Survey of Executive Leadership. Managers and peers of executives decreased their appraisals by 2% - 3% since five years ago. The good news? Measures of trust in these executives inched up from the lows of 2000 by about 4%.
What does the increased skill level of directors mean? The three questionnaires have remained essentially the same since the mid-1990s. The business population using them is also very similar. Are directors skilling up? Is this a reflection of the number of MBAs and other highly trained individuals in these positions? Have organizations done a better job of providing training?
We’re not sure why it happened, but it may bode well for the executive level as directors advance their careers. We wish them luck!
