360 Feedback Template

Choose people who have enough direct experience of the subject’s work to answer the questions. Use questions that each relationship can observe: a direct report can comment on clarity of direction, while a peer can comment on handovers.

Before collecting responses, explain the purpose, who will see them, whether names will be shown and how comments will be used. Do not promise anonymity unless your actual collection and reporting process can support it.

Use the same scale for every reviewer. This example is a starting point, not a validated assessment instrument.

• 1 — Rarely demonstrates the behaviour in situations I observe.
• 2 — Demonstrates it sometimes, with noticeable gaps.
• 3 — Usually demonstrates it in relevant situations.
• 4 — Consistently demonstrates it, including difficult situations.
• 5 — Consistently demonstrates it and helps others do the same.
• Not observed — I do not have enough experience to rate this.

Fictional response: communication — 4. “In the last two project handovers, Morgan explained dependencies and confirmed the owner of each action. When the delivery date changed, the update arrived before our planning meeting.”

Development comment: “On urgent requests, I sometimes receive the task without the reason for the deadline. Adding that context would help me prioritise.”

The example describes observable behaviour and its effect. It avoids guessing motives or judging the person’s character.

Keep “not observed” separate from a low score. Look for repeated themes and relevant examples rather than treating an average as a final judgement. Small reviewer groups and recognisable incidents can reveal identities even when names are omitted.

Discuss one strength to keep and one or two changes to try. Agree a follow-up date so the exercise leads to development rather than simply producing a report.