Comprehensive Guide to
Multi-Source Feedback
Limitations of
Multi-Source Feedback
While the content of the MSF instruments – the Interpersonal Skills Questionnaire, the Colleague Feedback Evaluation Tool and the Self-Assessment – may appear to be relatively simple, there is a substantial amount of research, time, money and effort invested in producing these ‘fit-for-purpose’ tools. For example, in the United Kingdom, the General Medical Council committed over GBP500,000 to ensure the tools used for their MSF program were robust, reliable and validated so data was meaningful for doctors.
A wide range of research has been conducted on the use of MSF internationally in various clinical settings. A review of eight systematic reviews demonstrated the evidence base supporting the statistical and psychometric properties of MSF is sufficient to support using the validated tool in the clinical setting.9 The structural validity of the MSF tool has been tested, confirming that MSF provides a reliable
method of performance assessment and a feasible method of assessing clinician performance in terms of response rates, time and costs.46 More recently, a critical review of MSF and its psychometrics noted that publications over the past 50 years or more in the business and health literature support MSF for quality improvement purposes.29
Specific research validating the use of the MSF in the clinical setting covers, for example:
Themes and corresponding limitations of MSF
Culture
MSF systems are deeply established in industry, with 360-degree type feedback routinely used a workplace assessment tool to:
- develop insights into individual strengths and opportunities for improvement
- enhance cultural change
- produce summative assessment of performance
- evaluate potential (e.g.g careers advice or selection)
- enhance team effectiveness
- identify training needs for the organisation.
Original work on the development of MSF tools for physicians was undertaken in the United States4,5 and later developed over several years by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta’s (CPSA) Physician Achievement Review (PAR) program6, and the Medical College of Canada.7,8
MSF is increasingly adopted within continuing professional development and regulatory frameworks worldwide as a method to assess medical performance and quality-assure clinical practice.9 The validity evidence for MSF used within medicine is well established, and MSF is now used in health systems across Canada, Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States, with interest growing in other countries.
Formative assessment
MSF is increasingly adopted within continuing professional development and regulatory frameworks worldwide as a method to assess medical performance and quality-assure clinical practice.9 The validity evidence for MSF used within medicine is well established, and MSF is now used in health systems across Canada, Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States, with interest growing in other countries.
Section 2: The Four Stages of Multi-Source Feedback
- Stage 1 – Objective and meaningful data collection
- Stage 2 – Analysis and reporting
- Stage 3 – Debrief and self-reflection
- Stage 4 – Action planning and CPD allocation
Section 3: How to Implement Multi-Source Feedback
Introducing MSF and applying the MSF tool requires organisational commitment and resourcing. Developing a robust implementation plan with a feasible timeline supported by an effective engagement and communication plan is essential for success.
Chapter 3 clearly outlines the key considerations when introducing an MSF program and provides suggestions for implementation strategies.
Section 4: Multi-Source Feedback Evidence Base
While the content of an MSF tool may appear to be relatively simple, there is a substantial amount of research, time, money and effort invested in producing these ‘fit-for-purpose’ tools. A wide range of research has been conducted on the use of MSF in various clinical settings that support the effectiveness and impact MSF has on quality improvement processes.
Section 5: Enablers and Success Factors of MSF
Lorem ipsum
Section 6: Limitations of Multi-Source Feedback
Chapter 1 summaries Multi-source feedback covering:
Appendices
Appendix A: Glossary