How much can we rely on others' ratings? A critical examination of multisource feedback on emotional and social competencies

The 360-degree assessment of Emotional and Social Competencies (ESCs) is becoming a widespread practice not only in the work environment for appraisal and development purposes, but also in some academic programs which aim to increase students’ awareness on their competencies and to build the required skills for their future professional career. Prior research mainly focused on the interpretation of the self-observer rating discrepancies, neglecting the issue of the appropriateness of the external raters involved in the assessment process. By analyzing data gathered from 352 graduates involved in a 360-degree assessment of their competencies while participating in learning programs on ESCs and from 1758 external evaluators, this study contributes to this debate by providing some methodological insights on the multisource assessment process and by identifying and explaining some discrepancies among different raters, in order to understand if there are specific categories of observers who can better assess specific competencies.