Reframe 5: The 360 As a Mirror of the System

Why Traditional 360s Are Dangerous

Traditional 360 reviews are dangerous — not because feedback is bad, but because these tools were built inside a dominant culture, for a dominant culture.

That means they often fail the very leaders who most need support:

• People of color

• Women

• Neurodivergent leaders

• Disabled leaders

• Immigrants

• Queer leaders

• Anyone who doesn’t fit the unspoken “default”

Even when you are the one who initiates the 360 with the best intentions, hoping to elevate your leadership, the structure itself has a built-in deficit. It doesn’t ask, “What support does this person need?”
It asks, “What are my likes and dislikes of this person, what do I want to see this person doing more or less of?”

That’s not development.
That’s social conformity.

For leaders outside the majority culture, the result isn’t clarity — it’s more masking. More editing. More pressure to soften, translate, or shrink.

Instead of surfacing what you need to thrive, a traditional 360 often reflects:

• other people’s comfort

• unexamined bias

• cultural norms

• neurotypical expectations

• power dynamics

• systemic strain

It becomes a story about how the system experiences you — not a reflection of your actual leadership.

The Reframe

A 360 does not define your worth or capacity.
It does not reveal your potential.
It does not tell the whole story.

It tells you who the system was capable of understanding at that moment.

Use what is genuinely supportive.
Release what is clearly projection or discomfort.

And remember:

Leaders do not grow by masking more or shapeshifting for the comfort of others.
They grow by receiving the support, context, and structures they were never given in the first place.