Wondering whether to conduct a 360 feedback review or a performance review? Both bring specific perks that can support an HR department in their employee performance management. Rather than considering whether to use one or the other, think about how you can use both options strategically. Below we will cover the key differences between the two to give you a stronger understanding of how to use them both effectively.
Feedback source in a performance review vs a 360 review
In a traditional performance appraisal, only the manager provides feedback. In contrast, within a 360 review, an employee gains feedback from a broad range of people in various positions. So, instead of gaining a deep level of insight from one person, they provide a broader range of input from many of the people an employee interacts with, from colleagues to clients.
Do not assume that feedback will always be fairer on 360 reviews. Often, a supervisor can be more objective than coworkers, as a good manager carefully keeps track of an employee’s accomplishments and progress. However, 360 reviews can give employees a broader understanding of how others perceive them by helping them identify patterns. For that reason, 360 reviews can help teams work together more smoothly.
The format used for each option
While a traditional review is not done anonymously, a 360 review typically entails partial anonymity. On the platform, reviewers and subjects are not able to see the responses of others, hence making the 360 reviews anonymous to them. Employment Hero ensures that, even when employees request to see their feedback, they will only see the feedback itself but not who provided it.
Admins, however, can see who provided which response.
Whereas a performance review involves a one-on-one meeting between a manager and employee, a 360 review gathers feedback without the employee being present. An HR manager might review the feedback with the employee afterward when sharing it.
While a traditional review is not done anonymously, a 360 review entails partial anonymity to encourage honest practice.
Peer & Direct Report Responses: These are fully anonymous. The employees being reviewed (reviewees) are not able to see the names of the individuals who provided specific responses; they will only see the feedback itself.
Self-Reviews: Anonymity does not apply to self-reviews. These are visible to the manager and Admin to facilitate a development conversation.
Admin Visibility: Only Admins can see exactly who provided which response.
Only Admins can create 360 reviews in Humi. Managers can participate as reviewers (providing feedback for their direct reports or peers) but cannot create 360 cycles unless permissioned via Custom Security Settings.
Purpose of a performance review and 360 review
A standard performance review often helps managers decide whether an employee should get a raise or a promotion. Many HR experts advise against using 360 feedback for that purpose, as it would promote a sense of competition among employees. This could skew results instead of fostering a positive workplace environment.
Instead, use 360 feedback for developmental plans. The 360 functionality supports various participant types, including:
Managers: Providing feedback on direct reports.
Direct Reports: Providing "upward" feedback on their managers.
Peers: Providing "sideways" feedback on colleagues.
To ensure data integrity, the system implements a rule requiring a minimum of three peers in the peer-review process to protect anonymity.
Rather, you should use 360 feedback to provide direction for a developmental plan for the employee. Employees will feel more receptive to feedback when they know the reason for it is to encourage and support their growth. To help promote their growth further, Employment Hero also ensures that the review process is thorough by implementing a rule of having a minimum of three peers in the peer-review process.
Focus of a performance review vs a 360 review
In a performance review, a manager evaluates whether an employee has met particular goals defined at the start of the appraisal period. Both the manager and the employee know what these goals are, and will discuss in the evaluation whether they were met. In other words, a performance review focuses highly on achievements, which tend to be based on measurable data. The manager aims to look objectively at the facts to determine whether an employee has met certain goals.
In a 360 review, all participants do not necessarily understand the goals of the person they are evaluating. They are not directly stating how well certain goals or objectives were met. Rather, they are answering a broad range of questions that collectively help define an employee’s strengths and target areas for improvement.
In the platform, Templates drive the questions asked during the process. This ensures that the feedback collected is structured and aligned with the organization’s values. When an Admin creates a review, they select a template that contains the specific questions the reviewers will answer.
Admin & Manager Workflow
For those managing the process, the workflow follows these key steps:
Creating a 360 Review: Setting the timeline and objective.
Selecting Reviewers: Assigning the manager, peers, and direct reports for the reviewee.
Adding Templates: Choosing the library of questions to be used.
Viewing the Report: Analyzing the aggregated, anonymous data once the cycle is complete.
Therefore, the scope of a 360-degree feedback review assesses skills like leadership abilities, teamwork, communication, and other soft skills that people witness daily. It provides valuable insights into how employees relate to others so they can keep growing in these ways.
In a performance review, a manager evaluates whether an employee has met particular goals or KPIs. It focuses highly on achievements based on measurable data.