360-degree feedback, also known as "multi-rater feedback," or "multisource feedback," is the feedback that comes from all around an employee. The results from 360-degree feedback are often used by the people receiving it to plan their training and development, career goals of the employees, and to prepare a performance development plan. Results are also used by some organizations in making administrative decisions, such as pay or promotion. However, there is a great deal of controversy as to whether 360-degree feedback should be used exclusively for development purposes, or should be used for appraisal as well. This article focuses on varied applications of 360-degree feedback from appraisal to development.

In working organizations, there is a legal and moral pressure to evaluate employees in an objective, consistent and fair way (Bacal, 2000; Greenberg, 1986). In order to fulfill this, and to eliminate subjectivity in appraisal, specialists came up with the concept of 360-degree appraisal. 360-degree feedback has revolutionalized performance management. 360-degree methods are not new to organizations. Though the technique became popular after 1940 in Western countries, there is still disagreement regarding the genesis of the technique. It has historical roots in the military context. In 1950s and 1960s, it has been extensively used within military service academy in the US. Organizations like Bank of America and Bell Labs started using it in 1960s. General Electric uses it and also provides all support needed by employees by conducting seminars and solving the individual issues online.

People will tell us what we would like to hear, not what they really feel. In an organization, the higher people move up the ladder, they become lonelier. The communication with others reduces; despite committing mistakes, subordinates hesitate to give feedback for fear of offending the boss. In most traditional methods of appraisal, the communication is one-way, from the boss to subordinate. Many methods are mechanical—only numbers are considered for appraising employees, with no weightage to human factors. The results of all these methods are not encouraging, employees hesitate to listen to their feedback, and at the same time, many managers also try to be good and avoid giving negative feedback. This affects organizational performance in the long run, as not many think of individual and organizational development.

HRM Review Magazine, Organizational Performance, Organizational Development, Decision Making, Institute of Personnel and Development, IPD, Organization's Culture, Administrative Decisions, Cross-Cultural Exposure, Organizational Goals.