The 360 degree feedback performance appraisal process is a comprehensive evaluation system for the individual managers. This comprehensive performance appraisal system provides feedback on a manager’s performance collected from a variety of people with whom he/she interacts regularly. Sources of feedback include the manager’s direct supervisor, peers, customers, vendors and a self-assessment.

Steps to be followed for the purpose are:

Here are a few good resources for the purpose.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/performance-management/performance-management-cycle/rating/360assessment.pdf

http://www.uri.edu/research/lrc/research/papers/Alexander_360.pdf

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/pdf/efop/efo29583.pdf

If the employee is at the center of the figure indicated above, the contents of the colored boxes indicated around each employee obviously will differ across employees. Given that there are f.i. 360 employees in an organisation, each employee will know its own 8 colored boxes substantially better than the Resource Manager that has to handle 360 employees and therefore '360 multiplied by 8' colored boxes, or not? 

The 360 degree feedback performance appraisal process is a comprehensive evaluation system for the individual managers. This comprehensive performance appraisal system provides feedback on a manager’s performance collected from a variety of people with whom he/she interacts regularly. Sources of feedback include the manager’s direct supervisor, peers, customers, vendors and a self-assessment.

Steps to be followed for the purpose are:

Here are a few good resources for the purpose.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/performance-management/performance-management-cycle/rating/360assessment.pdf

http://www.uri.edu/research/lrc/research/papers/Alexander_360.pdf

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/pdf/efop/efo29583.pdf

The reason why to use this full circle of confidential reviews is to provide the worker with information about his/her performance from many perspectives

Dear @Sundar, fine readings and expanations are given already. "In human resources or industrial psychology, 360-degree feedback, also known as multi-rater feedback, multi source feedback, or multi source assessment, is feedback that comes from members of an employee's immediate work circle. Most often, 360-degree feedback will include direct feedback from an employee's subordinates, peers (colleagues), and supervisor(s), as well as a self-evaluation. It can also include, in some cases, feedback from external sources, such as customers and suppliers or other interested stakeholders. It may be contrasted with "upward feedback," where managers are given feedback only by their direct reports, or a "traditional performance appraisal," where the employees are most often reviewed only by their managers."

Very fine paper on implementation is given:Planning and Implementing a 360 Degree Feedback Project !

Some additional studies show that 360-degree feedback may be predictive of future performance!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/360-degree_feedback

http://www.360degreefeedback.net/media/PlanningAndImp.pdf

Indeed, implementation of 360 degree feedback PA system in any organization is a symbol of transparency and salience of comprehensive feedback for enhancing organizational and individual performance.  Often, there is considerable politics and bickering in an organization among different interest and power groups. Such organizations must not implement 360 degree PA system where it can do more harm than good. In such situations, the organization should first build and implement an agenda of change management so as to build a facilitating culture.  

Excellent replies by all friends in this thread! Collectively, I thank all! Especially, I thank the great replies by esteemed friends - Mahfuz, Nageswara Rao, Ljubomir Jacić & Debi!

Another image on 360 degree performance appraisal! This is a very effective method, but implementation must be done with care. - Sundar

At  the outside i appreciate your planning approach of 360* degrees performance in the evalution of the organization .It is a good idea so to say a dream land of the organization .Any organization of the large magnitute obvisouly called for system -Method -procedure covering sysmatic manuals for the important division for guideline of employees so as to have the clear status & setup of the organization .Guideline of the quality control is a must under the inventory management covering the control of slow & fast moving inventory .

With this in the carrying out the proper & timely implementation a good structure to be developed  which called for a highly effective personal & HRD department for recruiting manpower of various direction for the managerial  affairs of organization this to be supplemented by various training programmes ,&  good Hr system within the set up .

To me in certain respect  due to various problems covering the labour fair unit is it possible to have a 360 * degrees success.......which i failed ...& let me confirm that i have never been a pessimistic in my life .

In 360 degree Objective Setting

Looks like a lot of good stuff, but it sounds gimmicky to me.

I can put boxes (or circles, or spheres, or arrows, etc.) around the 360 degrees of anything and that doesn't imply that it is comprehensive or necessarily even useful (not saying that applies to this specific method though).

For comparison, I cannot visualize 360 degrees in the response by Krishnan, but it also seems fairly comprehensive in linking together objectives of, say, a medium sized business or a department of a fairly large business, from the level the organization to the level of the employee.

It provides people with some feedback in the blind area of the Johari Window. It is always helpful to have at least one person give feedback who is likely to give some negative feedback.

I think a more relevant question would be why (or why not) you should implement such a system. 

I believe 360 assessments are valuable - but NOT for performance appraisals, especially if they are tied to compensation or other rewards.  These elements can undermine the integrity of feedback solicited. 

When used for development planning, it is very effective, if the organizational climate is one of trust and transparency. 

I have used the process in conjunction with leadership programs.  We linked the content to their corporate values and leadership competencies. 

Mary Ann Lesperance

You are right, Mary Ann, but how many organizations do actually succeed in downplaying the evaluative or administrative purpose? Maybe those without PM systems and P4P. 

I think Mary Ann is right. Linking compensation is never a good idea. I have seen so many companies where people "invented" their peer reviews, it is just laughable.

But: I find it a good tool IF the company is willing to act on its findings. And acting means development and even people selection.

Negative findings should cause actions, otherwise your response rate will drop to dismal levels anyhow after a year.

I find the notion very dubious that 360 degree feedbacks will identify malperforming "workers". In 95% of all companies the first thing you will find are underperforming managers up to the board of directors. And there you will have the tough situations when trying to identifying your actions. An underperforming "worker" (and be it some secretary) is no problem to the usual company.

One of the pertinent issue of employee performance appraisal is always related to problems around fairness, personal bias, quantifying the qualitative attributes, and the implication of the exercise.

The 360degree model is no excuse. Conceptually is beautiful and likeable by employees but practically may not be effective. I would suggest to assign different weightage on each party to differentiate the different degree of influence on the results.