Kanika Datta, in her column, "Bureaucracy on the 360-degree treadmill" (June 30) makes noteworthy observations about the use of the 360-degree method in appraising bureaucrats.
Because the system requires subordinates also to rate their bosses, it requires a work culture of tolerance for dissent and a style of participatory leadership. As bureaucracy is based on hierarchy and conformity, the chances of successful operation of the system are remote. The work culture has to change first.
The use of dual appraisal techniques - annual confidence reports and the 360-degree method - is problematic. A well-conceived approach is needed. While the former can be designed to evaluate current performance and determine financial incentives, including increments, the latter can be used to judge the appraisee's potential, leadership style and chances of promotion.
The 360-degree method works best when the number of appraisers is at least 10 and confidentiality of feedback is assured. The system expects the appraiser to share the feedback with his team, accept collective judgement and take corrective action. Whether this would be possible in a government set-up is debatable.
As mentioned in the article, evaluation based on values and ethics is crucial. It may be possible to include this as the deciding factor in awarding increments and promotion, irrespective of high scores on all other parameters. But who will certify the integrity of the appraisee when most of the bureaucracy is seen as vulnerable to temptations of various kinds? Will it ensure a high grade for an honest officer like Ashok Khemka of the Haryana cadre?
Y G Chouksey, Pune
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number
