Must try harder, sir

By VICKI JAYNE

A few years back, telling commanding officers in the armed forces how they might lift their leadership game would have been unthinkable.

Giving bosses feedback on what they're getting wrong is challenging enough in civvy street, so the introduction of 360-degree reporting in the Royal New Zealand Navy in 2001 inevitably raised a few anxious eyebrows.

The theory of 360-degree reporting is that by getting feedback on your performance not just from those higher up the hierarchy but from peers and subordinates, you get a well-rounded appraisal of your strengths and weaknesses. Then, of course, you can set about improving the weak bits.

Nice theory, but there are a few problems in practice - power, politics and paranoia for starters.

It could be politically unwise to be too forthright about the failings of someone with more power than you. And leaders have to be either confident or thick-skinned enough to handle the criticisms that head their way - especially as tall-poppy scything is sometimes seen as a national sport.

But two years on and heading into its third round of 360-degree reporting, the Navy's Project Compass initiative is earning praise not only within the organisation but from outside.

It earned a highly commended award at last year's Human Resource Institute HR Initiative of the Year Awards.

So, how did the Navy get it right when less overtly hierarchical organisations have failed? Answers include the right culture, a circumspect process and what Lieutenant Commander Beryl Oldham - who with fellow Lieutenant Commanders Ed Isaac and Sonya Borick designed Project Compass - describes as a "softly, softly" approach.

"It was introduced on a voluntary basis - there's no compulsion to take part," she says.

"Plus we're using it for leadership development purposes, not as a performance appraisal tool, which means the feedback has no implications for promotion or pay.

"Also, we ensured anonymity for those doing the rating, and when the person gets their report, they don't have to share it with anyone if they choose not to."

As well, Project Compass has to be seen in the larger context of a naval excellence programme ("Nx") launched in 1998, says Oldham.

This uses the United States-designed Baldrige criteria for benchmarking excellence in seven categories: leadership, strategic planning, customer and market focus, information and analysis, human resource focus, process management and business results.

"There's been a climate of continuous improvement and culture change in the organisation for some time, so we were ready for this type of reporting," says Oldham. "The 360-degree is a good tool for measuring leadership and the culture was right for it to happen."

Sure, there was a bit of angst about, "because military organisations just don't do this kind of reporting".

But it helped that senior commanders, including CEO equivalent, Chief of Naval Staff Rear Admiral Peter McHaffie, were among the first 60 volunteers.

For McHaffie, the feedback proved welcome confirmation that his own self-assessment wasn't too far off the mark.

"What I think I've been doing right appears to be validated by the feedback I've received from those immediately below me," he says.

Others, such as Captain Fleet Personnel and Training Pat Williams, started off feeling "a little apprehensive" but found more good news than anticipated.

"Generally, I underestimated my performance," he says.

"Everyone thought I was doing a better job than I did."

An added bonus for him was the opportunity through feedback to align his perceptions of what were the most important aspects of his job with those of his superior. "I found that a real strength."

Whether the feedback is negative or positive, McHaffie sees 360-degree reporting as a useful reality check.

"I think even the best leaders would know they have some shortcomings - things they could do better.

"The fact that someone, not completely independent but in the same line of business, confirms your own perceptions is very validating."

A keen advocate of the Nx programme first introduced by his predecessor, former Rear Admiral Fred Wilson, McHaffie says it's all to do with applying best business practice to what is, in effect, a business.

"We felt we needed to be a bit sharper in the way we approached that - to get away from some traditional aspects and be a bit more embracing of the innovation going on out there."

The Navy is already earning a reputation for some fairly enlightened HR policies. In 2001, it won an award from the Equal Employment Opportunities Trust for a programme designed to make gays and bisexuals feel welcome.

"It has certainly moved on since I joined as a 17-year-old," agrees McHaffie. "I probably went 25 years before seeing anything that resembled a survey."

Even Navy language has moved into a more businesslike mode.

"Now, for instance, I talk about my customers or my stakeholders and regularly seek feedback from those groups as to what their expectations are."

While senior command get 360-degree feedback only from those who work with them and report to them, even ratings have their say in general surveys that evaluate the organisation's overall leadership.

Carried out electronically, Project Compass uses an off-the-shelf questionnaire customised to take into account Navy values and language.

This includes 144 items clustered around various aspects of leadership - from interpersonal and operational skills to dynamism - all of which are scored on a 0-5 scale.

Individual scores remain confidential, unless the recipient wants to share or use them for internal job applications, but the organisation knows collectively how participants are doing and can track which areas are improving, and which need improvement.

The upward lift in scores between the first and second rounds suggest those who participated in both have already taken the feedback seriously.