Skip Navigation


Rheumatology Advance Access originally published online on June 27, 2003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
42/11/1404    most recent
keg387v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Potter, T. B.
Right arrow Articles by Palmer, R. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Potter, T. B.
Right arrow Articles by Palmer, R. G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Diagnostics and Imaging Procedures
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Rheumatology 2003; 42: 1404-1407
© 2003 British Society for Rheumatology

360-degree assessment in a multidisciplinary team setting

T. B. Potter and R. G. Palmer

Birmingham Heartlands and Solihull Hospital NHS Trust (Teaching), Solihull, UK.

Correspondence to: R. G. Palmer, Clinical Director of Rheumatology, Birmingham Heartlands and Solihull Hospital NHS Trust (Teaching), Lode Lane, Solihull, West Midlands B91 2JL, UK. E-mail: Robert.Palmer{at}heartsol.wmids.nhs.uk

Objectives. To use the 360-degree assessment in the multidisciplinary setting of a rheumatology department and to evaluate its impact, recognizing that this process will become part of the revalidation process of NHS professionals in the future.

Methods. Seventeen team members completed an anonymous questionnaire to give confidential opinions about the clinical, humanistic and other skills of their colleagues. Results and comments were collated and given as feedback to each individual. Before feedback, participants were asked to predict their perceived strengths and weaknesses. After feedback they evaluated the process.

Results. A profile of abilities was established for each team member and discussed privately with the clinical director. Often team members had good insight into their perceived strengths and weaknesses. Some participants were hurt by negative comments made about them even if this was balanced by positive comments. There were mixed views on the relevance and usefulness of the process, and whether or not it should be repeated. Some team members found the process threatening.

Conclusion. The 360-degree assessment can be used in a multidisciplinary setting, the questions being the same for all individuals. It is a very powerful tool that must be handled carefully so that it does not cause more harm than good.

KEY WORDS: 360-degree assessment, Multidisciplinary team


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Rheumatology (Oxford)Home page
C. Dowson, A. Hassell, and on behalf of the members of the Training Sub-commi
Competence-based assessment of specialist registrars: evaluation of a new assessment of out-patient consultations
Rheumatology, April 1, 2006; 45(4): 459 - 464.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.