Why comparisons matter
A 360 feedback assessment provides valuable insight into how you see yourself and how others experience you at work. It highlights strengths, blind spots, and opportunities for growth.
But the real power comes when you revisit the assessment later. By comparing results across different points in time, you can see how perceptions have shifted, whether development efforts have paid off, and where to continue focusing.
Repeating a 360 after 6-12 months allows you to measure progress in a meaningful way. This comparative approach turns feedback into a cycle of reflection, action, and improvement - showing you not just where you stand today, but how far you’ve come.
How to use the comparison feature
First you need to have completed more than one 360 assessment, assuming you have the comparison function becomes available.
1. Add a comparison
Click on the comparison option.
Select one of your previous assessments.
Click OK to link them to your current results.
2. View performance differences
Previous scores will display in brackets (e.g. Demo Q1 Leaders).
Current scores will appear alongside them for easy comparison.
3. Analyse relative strengths
The scorecard shows last assessment scores (light blue), current scores (light orange) yellow, and the gap between them (darker blue).
This makes it easy to see which strengths have remained consistent and where progress has been made.
4. Understanding score differences
A red or green dot highlights where differences exist between your assessment and your raters' assessment (aggregated).
Red or green doesn't indicate positive or negative per se.
Red is where you see yourself stronger than others see you and green where they see you stronger than you see yourself.
Look for green scores to indicate positive growth.
5. Conduct side-by-side analysis
Compare scores directly to identify trends and patterns. This is where the real value lies.
This helps you understand whether progress is consistent across areas or concentrated in specific skills.
What does success look like in a 360 comparison?
When reviewing your 360 results over time, it’s useful to think about two dimensions:
The perception gap – the difference between how you rate yourself and how others rate you.
The overall scores – the absolute level of competence and behaviours as recognised by you and your colleagues.
Both matter, but they tell you different things:
Gap narrowing shows greater self-awareness. You are seeing yourself more closely to how others see you. This is a positive outcome - provided overall performance levels are stable or rising.
Overall score improvement shows growth in competence and effectiveness. Even if the gap widens slightly, higher scores mean your colleagues recognise progress and stronger capability.
Success scenarios
Best case: A narrowing gap and rising overall scores. This means you are becoming more self-aware and more effective.
Good case: Rising overall scores even if the gap widens. Competence is improving, which benefits your role and your organisation. The widening gap may simply mean you are setting higher standards for yourself or are being more self-critical.
Warning case: Narrowing gap but declining overall scores. While you may be more self-aware, this indicates performance is slipping. It suggests your focus should shift to developing capability, not just alignment.
Our guidance
Success in 360 comparisons is about balance. Strive for both alignment (reducing blind spots) and growth (higher overall competence). If you see improvement in one but not the other, use the insight as a guide for your next development priorities:
Focus on raising performance if overall scores are declining.
Focus on self-awareness if gaps are widening despite growth.
The ultimate aim is to achieve steady improvements in capability alongside healthy self–other alignment.
Prism comparison analysis
You can request PRISM to generate a comparative report. Prism takes your raw 360 feedback results and automatically translates them into a structured written analysis. Instead of leaving you to interpret scores alone, Prism highlights where themes have improved or declined, where self-perceptions diverge from others, and how different rater groups (such as line managers, peers, and direct reports) align or differ.
This creates a narrative that explains not just the numbers, but the story behind the changes. By surfacing notable divergences and summarising areas of progress or decline, Prism makes it easier to understand trends, focus on meaningful insights, and take action.
Note: not every organisation enables this feature, but if available, it provides an additional layer of interpretation that saves time and ensures feedback is both accessible and actionable.
The value of Prism
Saves time: Automatically converts complex results into plain language.
Tells the story: Explains not just what changed, but why and where.
Spotlights divergences: Quickly shows where self-perception differs most from others.
Brings clarity across groups: Highlights how different perspectives (managers, peers, direct reports) align or contrast.
Supports action: Identifies priorities for development based on evidence, not guesswork.