Click here for this episode’s show notes.

This transcript was created using an automated transcription service and may contain errors.

Kourtney McCauliff (00:01)
We were framing it as this is a learning opportunity. It’s a development tool. This is not a performance scorecard. This is not meant to be a disciplinary action.

JoDee Curtis (00:18)
Welcome to The JoyPowered® Workspace Podcast, where we help HR and business leaders embrace joy in the workplace. I’m JoDee Curtis, owner of Purple Ink, an HR consulting and talent development firm, and with me is my friend and co-host, Susan White, owner of Susan Tinder White Consulting, an HR consulting practice. Susan is also a senior executive collaborator with Purple Ink.

Susan, let’s talk about 360-degree feedback. At its core, a 360 gives someone a full circle view of how they show up at work. Instead of feedback coming from just one direction, usually a manager, this pulls input from multiple perspectives. That might include peers, direct reports, sometimes even clients or external partners, and almost always there’s a self-assessment as well so people can compare how they see themselves with how others experience them also. That’s where the 360 really comes from. You’re not just looking straight ahead, you’re looking all the way around.

Now why would someone actually want that kind of feedback, either as an individual or as a leader thinking about using it in the organization? Well, one of the biggest reasons is self-awareness. A single manager can’t see everything, especially when someone’s impact changes depending on who they’re interacting with. You might lead up really well, but struggle leading across, or peers may experience you very differently than your direct reports. A 360 helps surface those patterns, the things that might otherwise stay invisible.

Another really important reason is development. A 360 is not about evaluation or discipline. It’s not about catching people doing something wrong. When they work well, they are about growth and alignment. In fact, that distinction might be the difference between a 360 that helps and one that causes damage. If people believe the process is designed to judge them, they’ll either shut down or game the system, but when it’s clearly positioned as a development tool, it opens the door to honest reflection and real learning.

360s are also useful because they help organizations identify themes, not just one-off complaints. Instead of reacting to a single piece of feedback, you can look for consistency. What are multiple people experiencing over time? What patterns keep showing up? That’s where the most valuable insights usually live.

Remember, the real work starts after the report. Feedback without action actually erodes trust faster than no feedback at all. If people take the time to give thoughtful input and nothing happens with it, that sends a very clear message — and it’s not a good one. When feedback is paired with visible action though, it can actually strengthen trust.

Another benefit is that a well-designed 360 creates a shared language around leadership behaviors. Instead of vague vibes-based conversations — “You just need to be more executive,” or “People don’t always feel heard” — you’re talking about observable behaviors and aligned expectations. That alone can dramatically improve the quality of leadership conversations.

So when 360s are done well, what do they really unlock? Well, they give leaders a more complete picture of their impact because feedback is coming from different directions. They also tend to validate strengths, not just gaps. A lot of people are surprised in a good way to see what others genuinely appreciate about them. And that matters because development isn’t just about fixing weaknesses. It’s also about amplifying what’s already working.

From an organizational standpoint, 360s can also bring clarity to how small behaviors make a big impact. Leaders start to see that perception matters, not just intention, and that subtle changes in behavior can make a real difference.

And ideally, a 360 isn’t a standalone event. It’s paired with coaching or facilitated conversations. The report provides the data, but the coaching is what turns that insight into action or helps to reinforce those positive behaviors that are already there.

Susan White (06:17)
So JoDee, I love 360s and I have been a recipient of a 360 many times. I use — in my coaching practice, I will do 360s sometimes if the executive coachee would like to or their company would like for them to have a 360 view.

And I also work with organizations that are doing performance evaluations, and part of that is finding out what their staff thinks they’re performing, how their peers think they’re performing, and of course, how their boss. So not as just a standalone development tool, but actually part of their evaluation.

I will tell you that there’s so much good to it. I’m such a believer, but there are some downsides. So let’s talk through some of the risks or the low points of 360s so that we look at them, you know, good, bad and ugly.

First one, why the 360 may not be the right move. One is, is the organization ready for it? Is the individual leader ready for it? Leadership readiness matters really more than urgency. If leaders are not willing to hear the truth or the perception of truth, and they’re either likely to get defensive or angry or retaliatory, a 360 can actually do some harm.

It’s possible that the pool of peers or the pool of subordinates is so small that their feedback, maybe two or three, maybe four people, the leader could turn on them, right, if it’s so negative. So this is a tool that you really want to make sure that people feel like they can give honest feedback of their perceptions without any type of retribution.

So trust is really a big factor. If people don’t trust that the confidentiality of their input or the process or they suspect that the results could be used for punishment, for politics, for layoffs or performance scoring, the data becomes unreliable very quickly. People will either sugarcoat their feedback or they could weaponize it. Clear communication about the purpose and the process is essential to reducing the anxiety by anybody who’s going to be a respondent. And done well, it can really build trust, but if not, it could be worse than having not done it.

Another common failure point, that there’s no plan for what happens next, right? You can say how important it is that we don’t just do it in isolation. We share the data, but we don’t do anything about it. That’s really common, especially when organizations have a lot of priorities going on. They check the box, they did the 360, but there’s no facilitated discussion around it. There’s no coaching support resources or tools for the recipient of the 360 to help them act on it or to at least get back to all the respondents and say, hey, here’s what I’ve learned from my 360, here’s the one, two, three things I’m going to do differently, right?

Sometimes I’ve seen a 360 done and the people who respond to never hear anything again. And that’s, as you said, they’re not going to either respond the next time or they’re going to just waiting for that shoe to fall. So don’t do that. Rater selection really matters. If the participants are allowed to pick who gets to respond and it’s only their viewpoint of who they pick, the odds are they’re going to pick people who they know like them or that they talk to, right, which could skew the unrealistically positive results. Or on the flip side, poor organization selection can miss key stakeholders or make it feel unfair.

I can remember when I was with a large corporation, part of our annual review process was the incumbent got to pick internal clients that use their services, and they selected them, they always picked the clients who like them. Then I, as the boss, would have to intervene sometimes and say, I know there’s a couple clients out there that you’re not crazy about. I don’t think they’re crazy about you. We gotta balance this. And it’s really uncomfortable. It’s uncomfortable for everybody, right? So the best results usually come from people who work with the individual most closely and most frequently.

And then finally, 360s can go sideways when they become all about the numbers. When organizations overemphasize scores, averages, and rankings, it can create fear, competition, and resentment. The real value is getting the feedback and having conversations, not the math.

JoDee Curtis (10:37)
Yeah, great points.

So when are 360s a good fit? Well, they work best when you can credibly position them as development, not discipline. When leaders are genuinely willing to receive feedback and be accountable for change; when you have the capacity for follow-up, whether that’s coaching, development plans, manager conversations or facilitated debriefs; and when you can clearly communicate the process in a way that builds psychological safety.

On the flip side, it’s a good idea to pause or avoid them altogether if trust is already broken and you’re hoping a 360 will magically fix it, if leadership wants proof or punishment, if there aren’t resources to support action afterward, or if the culture is high fear, high politics, and anonymity feels questionable.

And finally, because this is where everything comes together, the debrief conversation matters just as much as the feedback itself. A good debrief is not about defending scores or explaining away comments. It’s about curiosity. What patterns stand out? What surprised you? What feels affirming? And what are one or two things that you’re genuinely willing to work on?

That’s where a 360 stops being a report and starts becoming real development. As I mentioned earlier, I think it’s also important to pair a 360 with coaching. It can be tempting to share this information with someone and hope they’ll continue to emphasize and focus on their strengths or what they do well and take to heart and make a plan for areas of improvement. But good coaching, accountability, and follow-up can come from a good coach who follows up, checks in, and holds them accountable to repeat or change their behavior.

So Susan, it sounds like you’ve had a lot of success with them in your history, whether they were done on you personally or done on others in the organization. Do you generally recommend using them on people?

Susan White (13:34)
I do. I love it. The way that you’ve approached it today is really using it as a development tool, not as part of how you evaluate. I will tell you, I use them both ways. Certainly organizations… I can think of several that I’ve worked with where the board of directors want to really understand how the executive director is doing. And the board has their own opinion, but usually a board’s opinion of an executive is very different than the people that work for that executive, right? Or even if you — some organizations will, as you said, get input from clients. Well, in organizations that might be customers, it might be partners, it might be… depending on the nature of the organization.

I think it’s invaluable because it’s real easy to have a rosy look. Many, of us can manage up very, very well. We’re not always great at managing down or managing sideways. So I think as part of an evaluation, a 360 can be really useful. I love your perspective of divorcing it from the evaluation though. And if you’re using a development — using it truly as a development tool where it has no input or repercussions for your performance evaluation, that can be really healthy as well.

And I think the one thing that I learned through being a recipient and also helping facilitate 360s just as a development tool is that when you’re coaching the individual afterwards, when you have a debrief, don’t forget to spend time talking about how do we leverage your strengths. You — you’re hearing from up, down and sideways that you’re really great at negotiating or you’re really great at whatever it is, how do you impart that to others? How can we take that and level it up even? I think that is so important. It’s easy to go in, okay, you’re rated low here. What are we going to do to fix it? Yes, we want to figure out what we can do to do better tomorrow, but don’t forget to leverage those strengths too.

JoDee Curtis (15:28)
Yeah, yeah, great. Well, when I think back on that, so I also have had 360s done on me, and I’ve administered — or been a part of 360s on other people. And I think back now to those times when I was a part of, you know, telling our teams, like, okay, we’re gonna do a 360 on everyone all at the same time, and then people were buried in filling them out, right? Because they were filling them out for peers, for people who worked for them, for their bosses. And it was, I mean, I started to say it was a disaster. I hate to say that because I do think they can be really good information, but people were worn out, right? It was evaluation…

Susan White (16:21)
Yes, right. They become numb to it. They just want to get it done. Right. Not thoughtful.

JoDee Curtis (16:26)
And so definitely some, I think the most effective ones can be when you say, hey, you know, let’s, we want to really help Susan grow, so what do you think about having a 360 done focusing on one person? I realize that’s, you know, a perfect scenario, but where you really get the best information from all the participants and then stay focused on their growth because of it.

Susan White (17:00)
I work with one organization that part of their review process is to get peers to complete it and they get to pick who those peers are and it’s become to a point where everybody gives good reviews on their peers because they want them to give good reviews back and it really is useless. I mean… yeah, you have to really think about what’s the intention of your 360? Is it time to maybe put something on the shelf and then down the road introduce it a different way? You just want to be really thoughtful.

JoDee Curtis (17:14)
Right. Right.

Susan White (17:28)
Blanketing everything with a 360 is not the right answer. Be very targeted.

JoDee Curtis (17:34)
Well, I thought we would invite a guest today and we asked Kourtney McCauliff to be our guest today as not only does she sit on the consulting side of offering 360s to clients here at Purple Ink, but we really got to know Kourtney when she was a client of ours and had asked us to facilitate 360s on her leadership team.

Kourtney, SHRM-CP, has worked in the human resources industries for over 15 years, gaining experience in people development, retention, employee engagement and compensation. As a seasoned VP of consulting services for Purple Ink, Kourtney is passionate about cultivating cohesive teams and developing strong leaders to lead them. She is certified DISC and Mental Health First Aid instructor and is always interested in connecting with new people, so don’t hesitate to find her on LinkedIn.

Susan White (18:47)
Kourtney, we are so glad you’re joining us today.

Kourtney McCauliff (18:49)
Thanks for having me, I appreciate it.

Susan White (18:51)
From an organization’s viewpoint, when is a 360 the right tool and what kind of problems or issues you’re trying to solve when you use a 360?

Kourtney McCauliff (19:04)
Susan, that’s a great question. And I think from my experience when my company has utilized a 360, we weren’t really looking for feedback just for the sake of gaining feedback, but we were really wanting clarity around what we were doing well and where we maybe had some gaps in our leadership behaviors across the organization. And so the goal for our evaluation really wasn’t a discipline or any sort of disciplinary action, but it was more of a development and alignment tool. So I think companies are ready for this tool when they are ready to hear and use the feedback. It’s not just for the sake of getting it, but they’re really going to apply what they learn in the tool.

Susan White (19:51)
And how large was your company when you decided that was an important development tool? How many people?

Kourtney McCauliff (19:56)
So our company was about 240 people company wide. Our leadership team had seven people on the leadership team at the time. And then we also knew there were a couple of people that were highlighted for future development or promotion, and so we opted to pull them into this process as well so that when we were getting our feedback, it was the team we had envisioned being our leadership team when we applied the feedback.

Susan White (20:23)
I love that you did that. And from a succession planning standpoint, some of those — that emerging talent who might eventually get to the C-suite, what a great chance for you to figure out what’s working for them and what’s not and give you time to ready them up.

Kourtney McCauliff (20:35)
Yeah, absolutely. For us, it wasn’t that something was broken, but we wanted maybe more clear clarity around how the leadership could really show up for our organization.

Susan White (20:45)
Beautiful.

JoDee Curtis (20:46)
Nice. Nice. And any surprises that you had throughout the process?

Kourtney McCauliff (20:52)
Yeah, always. I think for some times, you you’re a little bit nervous when you’re doing the 360 because the unknown can be a bit nerve-racking. But what we were surprised from our standpoint was the consistency in the gaps or in the feedback that we were getting. So it wasn’t only that I, as a self, was seeing some of those areas of opportunity, but people I was working shoulder to shoulder with and people that I was managing had also seen some of those areas of opportunity as well. And so it wasn’t maybe a surprise in a single comment or in a single action, but really how small behaviors could add up to impact of the team as a whole.

JoDee Curtis (21:34)
And probably helped with your goal initially then too, right, to see those.

Kourtney McCauliff (21:41)
Yeah, absolutely. And so it was kind of reassuring in that what we did know, but then also give some, some credit into maybe where we were thought we were misaligned or some opportunities that we could really see with the team.

JoDee Curtis (21:57)
Yeah, nice.

Susan White (21:58)
Kourtney, now that you’ve facilitated a 360 internally and now that you do it externally for clients, how would you advise our listeners on communicating the purpose and process of 360s to the team that you build trust and you minimize that anxiety?

Kourtney McCauliff (22:03)
Yeah, so anxiety is a really great word to use with this. Anytime you’re utilizing the phrase “assessment” or “a 360 review,” people get really nervous. And so we were intentional about how we were framing it as this is a learning opportunity. It’s a development tool. This is not a performance scorecard. This is not meant to be a disciplinary action. And we were really transparent in our why. So this was an opportunity for our leadership team to kind of step up and grow ourselves as we have been hoping to grow the team as a whole.

And we were also pretty transparent with our results. So things that were shared, we highlighted, hey, we just went through this 360 process, as many people know, here is what we’re going to be working on as a team so that we could help people be upfront with that feedback that can sometimes be a little bit uncomfortable. And we tend to shy away from that discomfort.

JoDee Curtis (23:16)
Yeah, I think that’s interesting too, looking for patterns or consistencies, not only in an individual, but across the team. Like to say, hey, we all need to be working on delegation or many of us had comments about not providing good feedback or whatever that might be.

Kourtney McCauliff (23:39)
Yeah, yeah. JoDee, for us, it was about helping us lead the organization better together. And so it’s part of why we did the 360 as a whole team, as opposed to kind of doing it individually at different times during the year. But how could we together help improve our organization?

JoDee Curtis (23:59)
Yeah, very nice. And looking back, what advice would you give other organizations considering 360 for the first time?

Kourtney McCauliff (24:10)
Yeah, this was something I had to learn the hard way when I did the 360 and that is don’t rush the process. You know, the readiness is more important than maybe the urgency to completing it. You know, having done assessments myself, having led these, now I can see making sure people feel really comfortable about the process first, leaning into that communication so that people are ready to receive the feedback and that they’re willing to hear what is shared.

And then also planning on what happens after the results. Sometimes people do the assessment, they read the results, they say, okay, this is a lot of information to process — and it is — and then the conversation ends. And really it is also about what happens next. How are you going to use that feedback? How are you gonna bring that feedback to life as opposed to kind of ignoring the results and not doing anything at all with it?

JoDee Curtis (25:07)
Yeah, yeah, good.

Susan White (25:09)
So Kourtney, how important do you think the actual platform or tool is that you choose to run your 360 process?

Kourtney McCauliff (25:16)
Yeah, I think the tool is really helpful in understanding what your goals are or what comes next. And for us, when we did this as an organization, we utilized a third-party facilitator to help make sure that there was nobody caught in the middle of the process and everybody felt comfortable with kind of where that information was going. And so that part of the process was as equally important to us as the tool itself.

But then the tool is helpful to make sure that it’s aligning with your goals and what you hope to gain from the 360. Various tools may dig in on different types of competencies or different types of aspects of a leader, so knowing what you hope to accomplish helps you align with the right tool and right partner.

Susan White (26:07)
So I’m thinking about the platforms that I’ve been familiar with. I’d love any recommendations that you have. SurveyMonkey, I’ve used a number of times. I’ve got a client who wants us to use Microsoft Survey form next. And I’ve also worked at a large organization where they built their own. Do you have any recommendations for listeners where they should look for a tool?

Kourtney McCauliff (26:20)
Yeah, and I think some of that may be budget dependent or access dependent. I know we — I’ve utilized Microsoft Teams, I’ve utilized Google Forms, SurveyMonkey. We utilize and partner with Talassure quite often. And so, you know, making sure that you know the goals of what you hope to accomplish, but then also maybe some possible barriers you have. You know, people see Microsoft Teams or Google, they may question if it is confidential. It is, it’s still confidential, but it helps you then frame the communication so that it helps alleviate some of maybe those discomforts with the various tools or platforms. Yeah.

Susan White (27:11)
Great, thank you.

JoDee Curtis (27:14)
And Kourtney, you know, we always like to ask a JoyPowered® question. So what do you think is one small step people can do in this area of 360s to create more joy?

Kourtney McCauliff (27:26)
Yeah, I think creating joy around 360s is able to be done when people feel comfortable with the process. So, you know, explaining your why, explaining what you hope to accomplish, and then utilizing the 360s to celebrate the wins because they’ll be there. And so highlight what’s going well and then say, okay, well, here’s where we can dig in next. But for me, the joy is in the wins.

JoDee Curtis (27:51)
I love that. Great advice. Kourtney, how can our listeners reach out to you if they want to learn more about 360s or connect with you?

Kourtney McCauliff (28:03)
Yeah, so you can find me on LinkedIn or you can reach out to me at Kourtney at purpleinkllc.com.

JoDee Curtis (28:11)
Great, thanks again for joining us.

Kourtney McCauliff (28:13)
Yeah, thanks for having me. Thank you.

Susan White (28:14)
Thank you Kourtney.

JoDee, we have a listener question. “Do you have any tips on how we can provide professional development to staff in higher ed that is low cost and effective? Any tips on grant writing or resources we can use?”

JoDee Curtis (28:34)
So I have to say sometimes when I hear these questions that our listeners have, sometimes I think, “I don’t know that answer, so I just won’t pick it.” But today, I decided I’m not really sure I know the answer to this one either, but I’m going to pick it. Certainly, I don’t have any real specific ideas about staff in higher ed.

But I think this is a valid question for many of us, right? That we’re all looking to provide or would like to provide professional ed to staff, and we’re all hoping it’s low cost and effective at the same time, right? So certainly looking for, in whatever your industry might be — I know in the HR world, there are an inordinate amount of free webinars and resources.

I’m also a huge fan of just reading books, so even — and that could be maybe forming a book club that people read together or assigning people to read a book and share some information about it, having a team, you know, maybe read a chapter at a time and just doing a brown bag lunch and talking about the impacts of the book. I realize some books you may enjoy and really resonate with people and some might not, but I think it’s a worthy effort to do that as well.

I know we, Susan and I are in the state of Indiana and I think people are surprised many times when they go looking for training grants through the state. So not sure what state our listener is in, but we’ve had people at our state level tell us that most of their training grants go unapplied for. And they have them available and people just aren’t finding out about them or looking at them or applying to see if they might be able to get them. Certainly look for those opportunities as well.

I think the key point here though is that you’re asking about development, right? We all think development for people at any level of an organization is key and that many times comes from conferences or seminars or certifications, but it also many times comes from internal mentors, from internal coaches, external mentors and coaches are awesome too. Certainly external coaches might not be a low-cost item or a low-cost option for you, but you could also consider group coaching that might work for your people as well. Susan, any other thoughts on that one?

Susan White (31:47)
Yeah. I love all of those, no matter what industry you’re in. In higher ed, my guess is our listener probably is already involved in CUPA, the College and University Professional Association. They have an HR, CUPAHR. So C-U-P-A-H-R.org is a wonderful resource because it’s about human resource issues, development issues for professionals that work in HR and higher ed. So take a look at it. Maybe there’s a chapter that you can hook up with or just looking online with what was offered out there. So I’d really strongly encourage that.

Secondly, in addition to all the wonderful things that JoDee mentioned, I am such a big believer in LinkedIn Learning. There’s so many classes out there and sometimes they have higher ed related courses as well. And I love TED Talks. You know, I’m such a fan and there’s topics out there. Taking a TED Talk and maybe with the HR team at the university, spending time debriefing it, talking about it, maybe sharing it with faculty, with staff, could just be really great discussion starters.

So good luck. I would love to hear anything that you’re doing out there, listener, and maybe we can share your ideas. So thank you.

JoDee Curtis (32:59)
Yeah, love that. Yeah, nice.

Now it’s time for in the news. Jaclyn DeJohn, CFP, wrote a January 23rd, 2026 article on SmartAsset.com. SmartAsset ranked 357 of the largest cities in the US based on the percentage of people working from home. I thought this was so interesting.

Of course, there can be good and bad news in this data, right? Probably people are attracted to these top cities for various other reasons than employment. And when I share the answers with you, you’ll know why that’s true. But it can also be a loss for the city if they have a significant amount of people working from home who may not be spending money on computing or gas or coffee or lunches or meeting spaces, right? So you think there’s a, can be a good and a bad to that.

But the top five cities have between 28 to 34% remote workers. And that’s a significant number when only about 13% of employees work remote on a full-time basis in the country, right?

So topping this list at 34% was Frisco, Texas. Next was Berkeley, California; Cary, North Carolina; Boulder, Colorado; and Scottsdale, Arizona. So.

Susan White (34:46)
Okay, I’m not surprised about Scottsdale, Arizona, because I spend a lot of time in the Phoenix, Scottsdale area and anytime I go to lunch, breakfast, happy hour, there’s so many people there. I’m always like, why aren’t you working? They’re probably working there, working remotely. Yeah, that’s wild. Yeah, well good. Certainly I think we’re — the show originates from Carmel, Indiana and I don’t think we have… I bet we’re under that 13% of employees working remotely, be my guess. Interesting.

JoDee Curtis (35:12)
Yeah. Yes, I’m sure we are too.

Susan White (35:17)
Interesting article. Thank you.

JoDee Curtis (35:18)
If you’re SHRM certified, you can get credit for listening to this episode. To get the code, go to getjoypowered.com slash SHRM and fill out a short evaluation. When you finish the evaluation, you’ll get the code and a link to a proof of participation certificate. The code will expire on March 23rd, 2027. Again, that’s getjoypowered.com slash shrm to get the code and it will expire on March 23rd, 2027. Thank you for listening and thank you for your dedication to the HR profession. And as always, make it a JoyPowered® day.

Susan White (36:09)
Thank you.