--- title: "360 Degree Feedback Software — Multi-Rater Reviews That Re-Measure Change" description: "360° feedback cycles on a competency-mapped item bank: manager, peer, report and self ratings, database-enforced rater anonymity, blind-spot and hidden-strength quadrants, AI-anonymised comments, and a follow-up cycle that shows change. From 50 credits per subject." canonical: https://www.assessall.com/solutions/360-feedback source: AssessAll --- # See yourself as your team sees you — then measure whether it changed. A 360° feedback cycle gathers structured ratings of one person's observed behaviour from the people around them — manager, peers, direct reports, sometimes clients — and compares that picture with the person's own self-rating. AssessAll's 360° runs on an 83-item bank mapped to 29 competencies in its capability framework, rated on a six-point frequency scale with an explicit 'not observed' option that is excluded rather than scored. Four ready templates cover leaders, managers, sales professionals and individual contributors; the composer builds a custom instrument from the same bank. Raters answer on personal links with no accounts, anonymous groups are never stored with a rater identity, and small groups are merged before anything is shown. The report places every competency in one of four quadrants — confirmed strength, hidden strength, blind spot, development area — anonymises open comments with AI, and, when a follow-up cycle runs after a programme, shows the change against the first. ## What goes wrong today - **Raters who do not believe the anonymity** — A 360 is only as honest as its raters feel safe. Anonymous responses are written without a rater identity — a database trigger derived from the cycle's own settings, not an admin toggle — and any anonymous rater group with fewer than the cycle’s anonymity threshold — three completed responses by default — is merged into the combined others view before a single number or comment is shown, and if the merged view is still short of the threshold the others-scores are withheld entirely and the report says why. - **Comments that identify the writer** — Free-text is where the value and the risk both live. Open comments from anonymous groups are rewritten by AI to remove identifying detail, shuffled, and released only above the threshold; if the anonymiser cannot run, the comments are withheld rather than shown raw. - **Reports that describe and never develop** — Every competency lands in a quadrant — confirmed strength, hidden strength, blind spot or development area — and the subject's page carries a development focus of up to three competencies, suggested from the blind spots and development areas, which the programme team and the subject both see. - **A low score and a low-visibility score look identical on most 360 reports** — The competency at the bottom of a leader’s report is usually read as a development need, and about a third of the time it is something else entirely: almost nobody in the panel can see them do it. AssessAll’s six-point frequency scale carries an explicit “not observed” option, and the report arithmetic excludes it from every average rather than scoring it low — exposure information is never allowed to masquerade as a weak rating. Every item then carries its observed count, so a 3.4 rated by eight people and a 3.4 rated by two are visibly different findings. If a leader’s weakest competency has an observed count of two out of nine, the remedy is exposure, not coaching. - **No way to show a programme changed anything** — A follow-up cycle copies the panel with fresh links and freezes the same instrument, so the second report shows change per competency against the first — the paired-measurement logic the rest of AssessAll applies to knowledge, applied to observed behaviour. ## What AssessAll does - **Subjects choose their raters, a manager approves** — Send each subject a personal nomination link: they propose peers, direct reports and external raters inside each group's minimum and maximum, and the list goes to their named manager (or the programme team) to approve or remove names before anyone is invited. The approver sees who is proposed, never what anyone answers. Administrators can still nominate directly and override any decision. - **Importance for the role, not just the score** — Optionally, the self and the named manager rate each competency Useful, Important or Critical for the role. The report then ranks the gaps that matter most — importance weighted against what others see — and flags important areas where the self-view runs ahead. Anonymous raters are never asked, and the database strips importance from any anonymous response. - **A debrief pack and a facilitator link** — Every report comes with a coach's plan for the conversation, built from the report's cleared aggregates only: an opening, three data-led conversations on different competencies, questions to ask, traps to avoid and a close. Name a facilitator per subject and they get an accountless link covering that one person — the pack, the report, a PDF copy, the development focus and the release button. - **Sections per rater type, or a non-scored Focus scale** — Limit a competency to the perspectives that can see it — coaching rated by direct reports and the manager, not by clients. Or run the Focus 360, where raters say do less, keep the same or do more for each behaviour and the report reads direction instead of grades. - **PDF and white-label** — Subjects download their released report as a PDF; administrators and facilitators download a watermarked draft or a facilitator copy with the debrief pack. Rater, nomination, facilitator and report pages, emails and PDFs carry the client organisation's logo and colour, with a small 'Powered by AssessAll.com' that stays. - **A competency-mapped item bank** — 83 behavioural statements written for a six-point frequency scale, each tagged to one of 29 competencies in the AssessAll Capability Framework, with a self-rating wording for every item. Four warning-free templates ship ready; the composer uses the bank verbatim so scores stay comparable across cycles. - **Cycles with snapshotted instruments** — Each cycle freezes its instrument, so editing a template later never changes a running cycle. Subjects and raters are added per cycle; invitations and reminders send from the workspace with a dry-run preview and a 48-hour reminder cooldown. - **Personal rater links, no accounts** — Every rater receives a personal link that opens on any device and never redirects to a login. Drafts save as they go and are wiped at completion on anonymous responses. - **Four-quadrant report with verbatims** — Self versus others per competency, rater-group breakdowns above the threshold, confirmed / hidden / blind-spot / development quadrants, the highest and lowest rated behaviours ranked by what others see with a rater-agreement read on each, and AI-anonymised open comments — one renderer for the administrator's preview and the subject's own view. - **Release gate and subject link** — Reports generate as drafts. An administrator reviews and releases; the subject receives a private link, with an optional email. Regenerating a released report returns it to draft. - **Act, then re-measure** — Set a development focus of up to three competencies on the report; run a follow-up cycle on the same instrument after the programme and read the change per competency, with a cohort view of movement across everyone in the cycle. ## Use cases - Leadership development programmes: 360 before, follow-up 360 after, change shown per competency - Manager effectiveness reviews on the Manager 360 template - Sales team development on client-trust and negotiation behaviours - Succession and HiPo programmes paired with the Leadership Ladder readiness assessments - Individual-contributor development reviews with a development focus agreed with the subject - Training providers running client 360 cycles under their own brand --- Source: https://www.assessall.com/solutions/360-feedback