Developing a framework for assessing effective development activities

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to compare four different employee activities, namely developmental appraisal, coaching, 360 degree feedback and development centres, offering a comparative framework and an integration of existing research evidence. Design/methodology/approach The paper proposes a unifying classification which combines existing dimensions derived from the literature, such as the degree of formality, with further differences or communalities such as the degree of simulation, ownership of data and frequency of occurrence. This leads to a review of the pertinent literature and research evidence for each of the four activities discussed, with particular reference to long‐term outcomes, their social context as well as individual motivation. Findings The literature review did not produce equivocal evidence for the effectiveness of any of the four activities. Ratings in appraisals are flawed, whereas their developmental aspect appears dependent on the communication between managers and their charges. Also, there is little evidence on what happens as a result of appraisal interviews in the context of the manager‐employee relationship, and how organizations could best optimize this activity to aid long‐term individual and organizational development. Practical implications It is proposed that this classification framework could guide both the implementation and evaluation of diverse activities beyond those reviewed here. This framework may prove effective in making explicit and thus addressing the potentially conflicting expectations for prevalent activities from different parties involved. It is proposed that certain aspects of employee development, such as the employer‐manager relationship may be more suited to investigation through qualitative paradigms, but that ultimately more evidence is needed for long‐term outcomes at different levels (e.g. the individual and the organization). Originality/value The paper may help understanding of when, and under what conditions, which particular types of development activities are best suited to meet both individual and organizational requirements.