360 Feedback
Running a review round in HR means weeks of chasing late answers. Let the app do the chasing, while the person reviewed sees averages and never who said what.
People write honest peer feedback when it can’t be traced back to them, and here that is a permission rather than a promise: the person being reviewed sees the averages and never the individual answers. Each participant proposes their reviewers and their manager agrees the list. HR designs the questions for each kind of review, and self, manager, peer and stakeholder answers are scored against one shared list of competencies. The scores average into one figure per person for the calibration meeting.
What it does
- A review cycle with a deadline, rather than an open invitation
- Who reviews whom, proposed and then agreed by a manager
- HR designs the questionnaire without anybody changing the app
- Peer answers are unreadable by their subject, by permission not by promise
- Scores averaged into one figure per person, for the calibration meeting
- The app chases the silence, which is how a cycle usually fails
What's included
Records
- Cycle
- Participant
- Nomination
- Feedback request
- Score
- Questionnaire
- Question
- Questionnaire answers
- Answer
- Competency
Workflows
Cycle: Draft · Nominating · Collecting · Calibrating · Closed
Participant: Choosing peers · Collecting · Calibrating · Done
Nomination: Proposed · Agreed · Declined
Feedback request: Not started · In progress · Submitted · Declined
Roles
- HR
- Manager
- Employee
6 pages · 4 views
How it connects
Every app here installs on its own and works on its own. Adding a companion is what makes both do more.
What it does for you
- Ask the sponsor how a finished project went · Project Intake & Portfolio
- A nomination belongs to the cycle its participant is in
- Tell a reviewer they have been asked
- Remind a week before the deadline
- Chase feedback that is late
- Tell HR three days before a cycle deadline
Screenshots
