Fair Ratings and Honest 360-Degree Feedback Across Every Manager and Team
One manager rates everyone four out of five, another rates nobody above three, and staff compare notes. GullyHR designs the 360-degree feedback exercise and the calibration meeting that make ratings consistent, evidenced and credible across managers.
Not sure what you need? Tell us about your business in six short steps and we will come to the first meeting prepared.
Share your requirementsWhat is 360-degree feedback and rating calibration?
Multi-rater feedback collects anonymous, behaviour-based views of a person from managers, peers, direct reports and sometimes customers. Rating calibration is a meeting where managers compare draft ratings and justify them with evidence before anything is shared. GullyHR designs both for Indian startups and small and medium businesses: the questionnaire, rater rules, reports, distribution checks and the calibration agenda, with training for the people who run them.
The starting point
When businesses ask us for this
- Ratings differ more by manager than by employee performance, and staff know it.
- Almost everyone is rated good, so top performers see no difference in how they are treated.
- A manager's own view is the only input, and it tends to reflect the last two months.
- Employees do not trust feedback surveys because they suspect that answers can be traced.
- A 360 report arrives with personal remarks about the person and no pointer to behaviour.
- A manager who rates harshly is quietly adjusted by HR without any discussion.
- People who resemble their manager in background or style score higher than their results justify.
- Feedback happens once a year, and the employee is surprised by what they hear.
What the work covers
We begin by collecting draft ratings by manager and results data, such as target achievement, before ratings are shared. A distribution report shows averages, the share of top ratings, unchanged ratings from last year and gaps between ratings and results. In parallel we design the 360 exercise with the manager and employee: the rater circle, source weights, an anonymous form of eight to ten behaviours and two comment boxes, and a minimum number of responses before anything is reported. The calibration meeting follows, with the owner and managers presenting evidence for outliers and checking for halo, recency, similarity and inflation. Changes are recorded with reasons and signed off by a senior person. Debrief sessions turn 360 results into two or three development actions.
The 360 exercise is designed around behaviours that the business values.
We write eight to ten behaviour statements tied to your competencies, a one to five scale and two open comment questions, kept short enough to finish in minutes.
Rater circles and source weights are agreed before anyone is surveyed.
The manager and employee agree who sees the work. Weights are set by source, with the manager highest, so that no single group or friend circle dominates.
Anonymity rules protect honest answers from raters in small teams.
We set a minimum number of raters per source, remove comments that identify people or describe personality, and report averages by source, not by named person.
A distribution report exposes where ratings drift.
Averages, share of top ratings, central tendency, manager spread and comparison with results data show where ratings may be inflated, harsh or cautious.
The calibration meeting adjusts ratings with evidence, not seniority.
Each manager defends outliers with data. The agenda checks for halo, horn, recency, similarity and inflation motives, and every change is recorded with its reason.
Ongoing feedback habits keep the annual review from being a surprise.
Managers keep a simple feedback log, review it monthly for frequency, timing and quality, and practise corrective conversations through role-play coaching.
The process
How it runs
Collect draft ratings
Managers submit draft ratings and results data to HR before anything is discussed with employees. This gives a clean, unadjusted starting point.
Produce the distribution report
We compute averages, top-rating share, unchanged ratings and the gap between ratings and results, and flag managers whose pattern stands apart.
Design and run the 360
We agree the rater circle and weights, send the short anonymous questionnaire, collect responses and compile a report with scores by source and self against others.
Brief the managers
A short session explains the common rating errors with examples, and each manager prepares an evidence pack for any outlier rating.
Hold the calibration meeting
We facilitate a meeting with the owner and managers, work through outliers in turn, record each change and reason, and obtain a senior sign-off.
Debrief and coach
Managers receive 360 results privately, agree two or three development actions, and start a feedback log with a monthly review and role-play coaching.
What you receive
- 360 questionnaire with eight to ten behaviour statements and two comment questions
- Rater circle sheet and source weighting guide for each employee
- Anonymised 360 report template showing self against others
- Rating distribution and manager spread report with results comparison
- Calibration meeting agenda, evidence pack form and decision log
- Rating error checklist for managers with worked examples
- Feedback log template and monthly review sheet for each manager
- Managers coached in debriefs and corrective feedback conversations
Who it is for
- Owners who suspect that ratings reflect the manager's habits more than the employee's work.
- HR leads preparing the first calibration meeting in a growing company.
- Teams with several managers and a single increment or promotion round.
- Leaders who want an honest view of how their managers are seen by their teams.
- Companies where a first 360 exercise failed because people feared being identified.
- Businesses linking ratings to promotions and want a defensible basis.
Why GullyHR.
In smaller companies everyone knows everyone, so anonymity is fragile and ratings carry personal history. We design for that. Rater groups have minimum sizes, comments are cleaned before they reach anyone, and the calibration meeting follows a fixed agenda that keeps it about evidence. We also keep the questionnaire short, because busy managers will not complete a long form twice. The result is a process people trust enough to repeat.
Design the process
Map how the work runs today, then write the procedure, the forms and the approval route it should follow.
Strengthen management
Settle the structure, the roles and the decisions each level can take without the owner.
Develop people
Train the managers who have to run it — the review, the difficult conversation, the handover.
Automate HR
Configure the agreed process in software, so the document and what people actually do stay the same thing.
The difference
What changes
- Ratings are comparable across managers because each one has to justify outliers.
- The top rating is used for real distinction and not handed out to keep peace.
- Raters trust the exercise because anonymity rules are clear and followed.
- Managers see the gap between their self-view and how others see them.
- Each person leaves a debrief with two or three specific development actions.
- Every rating change is on record with the evidence and the approver.
How we are measured
Before work starts, we record where you stand. Every later report compares against that baseline.
We choose the measures with you at the start, from the list on this page, and only the ones your data can support. We do not promise a result. We promise a baseline, and a report that shows the change against it, whichever way it went.
The measures we choose from
Time-to-hire
Days from approved vacancy to accepted offer.
90-day attrition
New joiners who leave in their first three months.
Annual attrition
Leavers over the year, by team and by manager.
Payroll and statutory errors per month
Corrections after the run, and returns filed late.
Open compliance gaps
Obligations without an owner or a due date.
Employees with written goals
Share of the team that knows what it is measured on.
Review completion rate
Reviews finished on time, not just started.
Manager training coverage
Managers who have been taught the part of the job they were promoted into.
Working together
Who does what
| Activity | GullyHR | Your team |
|---|---|---|
| Designing the questionnaire and rater rules | Drafts statements, scales and anonymity thresholds. | Chooses behaviours that match the company's values. |
| Running the 360 survey and report | Sends forms, protects responses and compiles reports. | Encourages raters to respond and never asks who said what. |
| Facilitating the calibration meeting | Prepares the data and runs the agenda neutrally. | Managers bring evidence and the owner signs off final ratings. |
| Debriefs and development actions | Coaches managers and shapes the debrief format. | Employees and managers agree and follow the actions. |
| Link to pay, promotion or exit decisions | Notes where ratings feed into those decisions. | Has its own qualified legal adviser check any decision with employment effects. |
Where the software fits
Questionnaires can run on a form tool you already use, and responses are kept in a restricted folder that only the project team can open. The distribution report, calibration log and feedback log are editable sheets. The GullyHR software can collect ratings and 360 responses too, but it is optional. Response data is shared only in summary form.
Ways to engage us
- 360 pilot for managers
- A short anonymous exercise for a defined group of managers, with reports, debriefs and development actions. A good way to test the approach.
- Calibration cycle support
- A distribution report, manager briefing and facilitated meeting during one rating round. Suits a company about to finalise ratings and increments.
- Full feedback and rating system
- Questionnaire design, rater rules, 360 runs, calibration, feedback logs and manager coaching through a complete cycle.
- Alongside performance management
- We build 360 and calibration inside your wider performance process, linked to goals, competencies and manager development, so the parts work together.
Good to know
Questions we are asked
A 360 collects views about a person from several sources to support development. Calibration compares ratings across managers so that similar performance gets a similar rating. They serve different purposes and work best when kept distinct.
We advise using 360 results mainly for development. If they feed ratings at all, they should be one input among several and weighted modestly, because raters may change answers when they know pay is at stake.
We set a minimum number of raters per source and combine groups that are too small. Comments that identify a person are removed before reporting. The manager's own view is shown separately.
The manager can add evidence, and the owner or senior sponsor decides. The change, the reason and the approver are recorded. Calibration is a discussion, but the final call rests with the business, not the loudest voice.
The work is scoped and quoted in writing after a short call. It depends on how many managers and raters take part, whether you want one pilot or a full cycle, and how much coaching you need.
No. We build the system and facilitate the meeting, but managers rate and the owner decides. We also do not run payroll or handle statutory filings for any increment that follows.
No. We design the rating process and draft documents. Rules vary by state, sector and facts, so any employment action based on ratings should be checked with your own qualified legal adviser.
Prefer to talk first? +91 80958 58589 · hello@gullyhr.com