One manager's opinion is a narrow view. Peers see how someone collaborates, reports see how they lead, and managers see results. A 360 feedback template asks all of them the same short questions, so I can read the pattern.
Who gives the feedback?
Anyone who works with the person: manager, direct reports, peers, other teams and clients. Each writer says how they know the person. A writer's AI might ask: "Who is this feedback about?" Then "How well do they communicate, from 1 to 5?" Then "Can you give an example?" It shows the answers and sends only after a yes. Read about agent-fillable forms.
How do I keep it useful and kind?
Ask for an example behind every strong rating. Ask what to keep doing before what to change. Let each writer pick whether the words are combined without a name or shared with it. A peer review form like this is only as good as its examples.
What do I do with the rows?
Group the CSV by person and by relationship. Average each rating, read the examples and report themes, not single comments. If the review points to a skill gap, follow up with a training feedback form after the course. Check how team meetings run with a meeting feedback template. See forms for HR and recruiting.
Questions
Will the person see who wrote what?
That is your call. The form asks each writer whether to combine feedback without a name or share it with their name. Report combined results only when a group is small.
How many people should give feedback?
Ask a mix of manager, peers and direct reports. When one group has very few writers, merge groups so that no single person stands out.
Does the form send feedback to the person?
No. You read the responses and decide what to pass on. Group the CSV by person_reviewed, average the ratings and pick the clearest examples.