"It can fix or replace a flawed performance appraisal system." Managers often conclude that 360 is a high-tech answer to problems with performance appraisal. While 360-degree feedback probably should become part of the solution, it has never been used effectively to manage both performance development (competence) and performance review (results). The main value of 360 feedback is to give individuals information about the process of performance—how their work gets done. It’s not the best tool for evaluating performance results—what gets done—which in most cases are quantifiable and better measured by other means.
"It's only for managers and leaders." Twenty or thirty years ago, the first 360s featured a fixed set of measures focused on management or leadership. The primary market was managers in fairly large organizations. In the early 1990s, 360s began to focused on team leadership and team interaction. Today, the most effective 360 systems are open platforms for general skills assessment, with software that can set up and administer any locally validated assessment. This means that everyone in an organization can benefit from 360-degree feedback.
"It's a program you do one time." Because 360 used to be so expensive, many organizations didn’t think of it as a tool that could be used regularly. In the past, a fair number of managers participated only reluctantly, hoping to get it out of the way. 360-degree feedback is not a program; it's a diagnostic tool. Therefore, it should be administered periodically to track progress and create new priorities for development.
Source: 360 FYI