Feedback cycles that write to the person, not to a survey tool. Available as a ready-to-use Cordango capability.
Feedback cycles that write to the person, not to a survey tool
The awkward part of feedback is never the form. It is knowing who should be asked about whom, and that is a question about your org structure. Because the cycle reads real teams and reporting lines, the participant list builds itself and stays right when somebody moves.
The results land on the person record, under field-level permissions. Somebody's review history is visible to the people who should see it and to nobody else, without a separate tool having its own idea of who is a manager.
Pick the window and who is in scope. A team, a level, or the whole company.
Manager, peers and reports come from the structure already in the platform, so nobody assembles a list by hand.
Each participant answers on the person, under permissions that keep responses where they belong.
The cycle closes and the history remains attached to the person, next to their role, team and assignments.
Use the standard version where it fits. Change only the parts where your company is genuinely different.
Competencies, open text, ratings, or a mix. Ask what your company actually asks.
Peers only, upward only, full circle. Set the rule and let the structure fill it in.
Draft, open, closed, shared. Add a calibration step if your process has one.
The person, their manager, HR, or a narrower set. Field-level permissions make that precise.
360 Feedback does not build its own directory of who reports to whom. Cycles, participants and review history attach to the People records and reporting lines the platform already holds.