Purpose: A relatively new approach to principal evaluation is the use of multisource feedback, which typically entails a leader's self-evaluation as well as parallel evaluations from subordinates, peers, and/or superiors. However, there is little research on how principals interact with evaluation data from multisource feedback systems. This article explores how principals orient and react to multisource feedback on their effectiveness as instructional leaders and how they interpret gaps between their self-assessments of their leadership effectiveness and their teachers' ratings of their leadership effectiveness. Research Methods: Using interview data collected from 14 principals in an urban school district in the southeast United States at two points in time, this study conducts a qualitative analysis to examine principals' orientations and reactions to their feedback. Findings: Our study finds that principals often experience cognitive dissonance when feedback from different data sources (e.g., their self-ratings to those of their teachers) contrasts. This can result in a motivation to reduce dissonance either by providing explanations and excuses, or making actual changes that result in improvement. Implications for Research and Practice: As performance feedback continues to become more commonplace in school settings, it will become increasingly necessary to build capacity around the processes of giving and receiving feedback. Results from this study have implications for how principals can be supported to use their evaluation data.