THE FIRM WIDE 360

DEGREE
PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION
PROCESS AT
MORGAN STANLEY

Facts

Tom DeLong , recently appointed as chief

development officer.

A new performance evaluation system

adopted- 360 degrees.

360-Degree Feedback

The employees submitted Evaluation

Request form (ERF)- list of prospective
evaluators.

ERF reviewed and discussed with

evaluatees manager.

ERF submitted to Office of

Development which distributed to the
evaluators listed.

Evaluations after being done were

processed into a Year-End Data
Packet for each evaluatee.

Each professional also did their own

self-evaluation.

Issues with Old System

Assessments were done
verbally in a large group of
by all the seniors.
Oral meetings lead to
assessments.
No individual feedback was
given to the employees.

Evaluation Criteria
1.
2.
3.
4.

Market/Professional Skills.
Management and
Leadership.
Commercial Orientation.
Teamwork/One Firm
Contribution.

Pros of the Evaluation Process

The performance criteria were

rigorous as one moved up the
hierarchy.
A detailed and specific information
of broad cross-section of employees
could be achieved by managers.
Supervisor bias can be eliminated.
Open ended: Evaluators were free
to express themselves.

Cons Of the Evaluation Process

Subjective evaluation as a lengthy process.

Chances of errors as evaluation of comments
needed clear and consistent summaries.
Complete qualitative information was not given
by managers.
Grade-inflations- leniency error.
ANNUAL and not QUARTERLY feedback was
given
No initiatives to check reliability of assessors
ratings.

Training not given to the evaluators.

Superiors always came to know about the
subordinates who were evaluating them.
No separate weightage given to criteria for
different departments.
Parameters too vague in long evaluation formthere should be introduction of BARS
Evaluation request form doesnt specify time
span for evaluators
Unlimited number of upward evaluators would
make assimilation a lengthy process- can
cause rater overload.

Recommended Quantified Scale of

Assessment

4= this quality is highly characteristic of him/ her. (S)he exhibits

the quality all the time (90-100% of the time).

3= this quality is most characteristic of him/ her. (S)he exhibits the

quality most of the time (75% of the time).

2= this quality is somewhat characteristic of him/ her.

(S)he exhibits this sometimes (50% of the time).

1= this quality is very little of his/ her characteristic. (S)he exhibits

this sometimes (25% of the time).

0= this quality is not at all characteristic of him/ her. (S)he exhibits

this once in a while. (0-10% of the time).