Earlier in the year the New York Times carried an article on a management tool I was unaware of – the 360-review.  In my time as a manager we had annual staff performance reviews, strictly confidential and conducted between the manager and each of his/her staff.  The latest wrinkle on this is to encourage everyone in the department or company to comment on each other anonymously.

This is a horrible idea presumably originates  from some business school academic,  who, quite
probably,  has never managed a single soul in his whole life.  The article, written by a management consultant,  points out the flaws in this 360-review idea.  Comments, because they are anonymous, encourage cruel and personal comments that are hurtful and demotivating. Some people take advantage of them to avenge some slight or to get even about something they are aggrieved at.  The reviews tend  to happen when employees are about to be promoted or considered for promotion, or when their performance is sub-par and they could be sacked.  These events bring out the worst in some colleagues:  jealousy, personal dislike, ambition and sense of grievance.

The idea of these reviews is to make people better at their jobs.  I suspect that the opposite is the case. Human beings join groups for strength and mutual suuport, and in the hope that as a group they can be more effective than individuals.  It seems to me 360- reviews are more destructive than effective, poisoning the atmosphere  in a department and sowing suspicion.  They are definitely un-Epicurean and are inconsistent with a happy and ccopperative working environment.