Example 360 feedback questions by competency and rater group

Good 360 feedback questions describe one observable behavior each, so that a manager, a peer or a direct report can rate how often they see it. A useful set combines 25 to 40 rating items, grouped under five to eight competencies, with two or three open questions that ask what the person should keep doing and what they should change.

This article is a question bank you can adapt. It explains what makes a question work, gives example rating items for seven common competencies, suggests questions that suit each rater group, and shows how to choose how many to ask and how to fit them to a role. All the questions are original examples, not items from a validated instrument.

What makes a good 360 feedback question?

A 360 question has one job: to help a rater describe what they have seen, accurately and quickly. If raters have to guess, interpret jargon or answer two things at once, the report fills with noise. Most weak questions fail on one of a few predictable points.

The four tests every item should pass

• Observable. The rater can see or hear the behavior. "Explains the reasons behind a decision" is observable. "Thinks strategically" asks the rater to guess what is happening in someone's head.
• Single. The item covers one behavior. "Plans carefully and communicates clearly" is two items, and a rater who agrees with only half of it has no honest answer.
• Neutral. The wording does not push the rater toward a score. Avoid "always", "never", praise built into the item, and loaded words such as "fails to".
• Relevant to the rater. The rater is in a position to observe it. A peer rarely sees how someone runs a performance conversation with their own team.

Research on rating scales has long favored anchoring ratings in concrete behavior. Smith and Kendall (1963) built behaviorally anchored scales by asking people who know a job to describe specific behaviors at different levels, to reduce ambiguity in what each rating means. You do not need a full behaviorally anchored scale for a 360, but the same principle applies: the more concrete the item, the more consistent the ratings.

Weak and strong versions of the same question

Rating-scale items and open-ended questions

A 360 questionnaire usually mixes two formats. Rating items give you comparable numbers across raters and over time. Open questions explain those numbers and give the person something concrete to act on.

Choosing a rating scale

Two scales are common. A frequency scale asks how often the rater sees the behavior, for example from "rarely" to "almost always". An agreement scale asks how far the rater agrees with a statement, from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". Frequency scales tend to suit behavioral items, because they ask about what the rater has seen rather than their opinion of the person.

Whatever you choose:

1. Use five points, with each point labelled in words, not only numbers.
2. Add a "not able to observe" option so raters do not guess.
3. Keep the same scale for every rating item in the questionnaire.
4. Write a one-line instruction that tells raters to think about the last six to twelve months, not one recent event.

Open-ended questions that produce useful comments

Open questions work best when they are short, specific and forward-looking. Ask two or three, not ten. Good options include:

• What should this person continue doing because it helps you or the team?
• What is one thing this person could start doing to be more effective in their role?
• What is one thing this person could do less of, or stop doing?
• What would most improve how this person works with you?

Continue, start and stop questions keep comments practical and balanced. Avoid questions that invite judgments of character, such as "What are this person's weaknesses?"

360 feedback questions by competency

The items below are written for a five-point frequency scale. Choose the competencies that matter for the role, then pick three to five items from each. If you are still deciding which competencies to use, start from a clear competency framework so the 360 measures what the organization already expects.

Communication

• Explains the reasons behind decisions, not only the decisions themselves.
• Listens to a different view without interrupting before responding.
• Shares information with the people who need it, in time for it to be useful.
• Adjusts the level of detail to the audience.

Collaboration and teamwork

• Offers help to colleagues outside their own team when priorities allow.
• Raises disagreements directly with the person concerned.
• Gives credit to others for their contributions.
• Keeps colleagues informed when their work depends on this person's work.

Accountability and delivering results

• Delivers agreed work by the agreed date.
• Tells stakeholders early when a deadline or plan is at risk.
• Takes ownership of mistakes and focuses on putting them right.
• Sets clear expectations for what good work looks like.
• Follows through on commitments made in meetings.

Problem-solving and decision-making

• Gathers the relevant facts before reaching a conclusion.
• Asks for input from the people affected before making significant decisions.
• Makes timely decisions when information is incomplete.
• Makes clear when a decision is final and when it is still open.

Adaptability and learning

• Adjusts plans constructively when priorities change.
• Asks for feedback on their own work.
• Tries new approaches when the usual one is not working.
• Applies lessons from past projects to new work.

Developing others (for people managers)

• Gives specific feedback on what was done well and what could be improved.
• Delegates work that stretches people's skills, with support when needed.
• Holds regular conversations with team members about their development.
• Recognizes good work in a way that is specific and timely.

Leading the team (for people managers)

• Sets clear goals and explains how they link to the organization's priorities.
• Treats team members consistently and fairly.
• Makes it safe for team members to raise concerns or report mistakes.
• Communicates changes to the team promptly, with the reasons behind them.

Questions for managers, peers, direct reports and self-review

Raters in different groups see different parts of someone's work. Hoffman and colleagues (2010) found evidence of systematic differences between rater sources in multisource ratings. That is a good reason to report by rater group, and to ask each group about what it can actually see.

Example items for managers to answer

• Sets priorities that match the team's agreed objectives.
• Escalates risks early, with options rather than only problems.
• Represents the team's work accurately to senior stakeholders.

Example items for peers to answer

• Shares information that helps other teams do their work.
• Is reliable when other teams depend on their deliverables.
• Handles disagreements with colleagues respectfully.

Example items for direct reports to answer

These items are often called upward feedback. They work best when confidentiality is clear and the group is large enough to protect individual raters.

• Gives me the information I need to do my job well.
• Gives me feedback that helps me improve.
• Treats all team members fairly.
• Supports my development, even when it means time away from daily tasks.

Self-review questions

Self-ratings should use the same core items as everyone else, so the report can compare self-view with others' views. Write them in the first person ("I explain the reasons behind decisions") and add one or two reflective open questions:

• Which of your strengths do you think others most value?
• Which area would you most like feedback on in this cycle?