Performance Management¶

Performance management is not an annual ritual where you reveal a rating to someone who had no idea it was coming. It's a continuous system of clarity, feedback, and accountability that makes formal reviews unsurprising.

When done well, performance management aligns expectations, recognizes growth, addresses issues early, and creates fairness through consistent evaluation. When done poorly, it becomes a source of anxiety, surprises, and eroded trust.

This page describes a growth-first approach: one where the goal is always to help people succeed, where difficult conversations happen before review time, and where ratings reflect a year of continuous feedback rather than recent memory.

The problem performance management solves¶

Without deliberate performance management:

• Expectations are unclear. People don't know what success looks like until they fail to achieve it.
• Feedback comes too late. Issues are raised at review time, when they're too old to fix.
• Ratings surprise people. Conversations that should have happened monthly are compressed into one painful meeting.
• High performers are under-recognized. Without structured review, recognition goes to the most visible, not the most effective.
• Low performers linger. Managers avoid hard conversations, and performance issues compound.
• Equity suffers. Without consistent criteria, bias influences who gets rated how.

Performance management creates the structure that makes continuous feedback count and formal reviews fair.

When to use this approach¶

This playbook applies to:

• Regular performance review cycles (annual, semi-annual, or quarterly).
• Ongoing performance conversations in one-on-ones.
• Calibration discussions across teams.
• Performance improvement situations.

It assumes you have some kind of leveling framework or career ladder. If you don't, start there—performance evaluation requires a shared definition of what's expected at each level.

When this approach isn't enough¶

Performance management addresses ongoing development and assessment. It doesn't cover:

• Urgent disciplinary situations. Work with HR for misconduct or serious policy violations.
• Team-wide performance issues. If the whole team is struggling, look at the system, not just individuals.
• Compensation decisions. This playbook covers assessment; pay is a related but separate negotiation.
• Role mismatches. If someone is in the wrong job, performance management won't fix that. Address the fit directly.

Roles and responsibilities¶

The manager is the primary actor, but performance management is a partnership. If someone is surprised by their review, both parties have failed.

Core principles¶

No surprises¶

The cardinal rule of performance management is that nothing in the formal review should be new information. If a performance issue exists, it should have been named in one-on-ones months ago, with clear expectations and support provided.

Growth is the goal¶

Even when addressing underperformance, the orientation is toward helping someone succeed. Accountability and development are not opposites—they're complements.

Evidence over impressions¶

Ratings should be based on documented evidence: projects delivered, feedback received, behaviors observed. Recency bias, likeability, and halo effects are mitigated by structured evaluation.

Calibration creates fairness¶

Individual manager ratings are calibrated across the organization to ensure consistent standards. A "meets expectations" from one manager should mean the same as from another.

Difficult conversations are kindness¶

Avoiding hard feedback is not kindness—it's abandonment. People deserve to know where they stand while they can still improve.

The performance management cycle¶

Ongoing: continuous feedback¶

Performance management is not a moment—it's a practice. Throughout the cycle:

• One-on-ones include feedback. Not every one-on-one, but regularly. Use frameworks like SBI to keep feedback specific.
• Evidence is gathered. Keep lightweight notes on significant contributions, feedback received, and behaviors observed. You'll need this at review time.
• Expectations are clear. Each person should know what "meeting expectations" looks like for their role and level.
• Issues are named early. If performance is concerning, say so in the one-on-one—not for the first time at review.

Quarterly: check-ins¶

Formal quarterly check-ins prevent drift:

• Review progress against goals.
• Calibrate on expectations.
• Surface any concerns early.
• Adjust plans as needed.

These aren't full reviews—they're lightweight alignment conversations.

Review period: formal assessment¶

The formal review consolidates the ongoing feedback into a documented assessment.

Step 1: Self-review¶

Ask the individual to complete a self-assessment covering:

• Key accomplishments and impact.
• Areas of growth.
• Challenges faced.
• Development goals.

Self-reviews provide useful signal and give the person ownership of their narrative.

Step 2: Gather feedback¶

Collect input from peers, cross-functional partners, and (for managers) direct reports. This should be:

• Specific to the review period.
• Focused on observable behaviors and outcomes.
• Confidential but incorporated into the manager's synthesis.

Step 3: Manager writes the review¶

The review should cover:

• Summary of performance. Clear statement of how the person performed against expectations.
• Key accomplishments. Specific examples with impact.
• Areas for growth. Constructive, actionable, and connected to development.
• Rating. Where applicable, the formal assessment (e.g., "meets expectations," "exceeds").
• Forward look. What to focus on in the next period.

Write the review before calibration, but be prepared to adjust based on calibration discussion.

Step 4: Calibration¶

Managers across a peer group (same skip-level) meet to calibrate ratings. The goal is fairness and consistency:

• Are we applying the same standards?
• Are we rating the same performance similarly?
• Are there biases we're not seeing?

Calibration should include a diverse set of voices. Bring evidence, not just impressions.

Step 5: Deliver the review¶

Schedule a dedicated conversation—not a one-on-one that includes other topics. In the meeting:

• Start with the headline: overall assessment and rating.
• Walk through accomplishments and growth areas.
• Connect to development: what's the path forward?
• Create space for their questions and reactions.

If the review contains difficult feedback, don't soften it to the point of confusion. Be kind and direct.

Step 6: Follow up¶

After the review:

• Document any commitments made.
• Connect growth areas to the person's development plan.
• Continue the feedback loop—don't wait for the next review cycle.

Performance ratings: what they mean¶

Use clear definitions so everyone understands what ratings signify:

Avoid grade inflation. If everyone exceeds expectations, the rating has lost meaning. Calibration should produce a distribution that reflects reality.

Addressing underperformance¶

When performance is concerning, act early:

Step 1: Name it clearly¶

In a one-on-one, be direct:

"I want to share some feedback that's important. Over the past [time period], I've observed [specific issues]. This is below what I expect at your level. I want to help you improve, and I need you to understand the seriousness."

Step 2: Set clear expectations¶

Define what needs to change:

• Specific behaviors or outcomes.
• Timeline for improvement.
• How you'll evaluate progress.

Document this conversation.

Step 3: Provide support¶

Underperformance usually has causes. Explore them:

• Is there a skill gap? Provide coaching or training.
• Is there a personal situation? Be human, but maintain expectations.
• Is there a role mismatch? Consider whether this is the right fit.

Step 4: Monitor and follow up¶

Regular check-ins on progress. Document what you observe. Provide feedback on improvements and remaining gaps.

Step 5: Escalate if needed¶

If performance doesn't improve:

• Formal Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) with HR involvement.
• Clear timeline and criteria for success.
• Exit if improvement doesn't occur.

A PIP should be a final attempt to help someone succeed, not a documentation exercise for firing. Approach it with genuine intent.

Templates and artifacts¶

Performance review template¶

# Performance Review: [Name]

**Period:** [Date range]
**Manager:** [Manager name]
**Level:** [Current level]

## Overall assessment

[2-3 sentence summary of performance. Clear statement of rating.]

**Rating:** [Exceeds / Meets / Partially meets / Does not meet]

## Key accomplishments

- **[Accomplishment 1]:** [Description and impact]
- **[Accomplishment 2]:** [Description and impact]
- **[Accomplishment 3]:** [Description and impact]

## Strengths to leverage

- [Strength 1]
- [Strength 2]

## Areas for growth

- **[Growth area 1]:** [Specific feedback and suggestion]
- **[Growth area 2]:** [Specific feedback and suggestion]

## Forward look

[What to focus on in the next period. Connection to growth plan.]

## Peer feedback summary

[Themes from feedback, specific quotes if appropriate]

Self-review template¶

# Self-Review: [Name]

**Period:** [Date range]

## Key accomplishments

What were your most significant contributions this period? Include impact.

1. [Accomplishment 1]
2. [Accomplishment 2]
3. [Accomplishment 3]

## Challenges

What was difficult? What would you do differently?

## Growth

How did you develop this period? What skills did you build?

## Areas for improvement

Where do you want to grow? Where do you need support?

## Looking ahead

What are your goals for the next period?

Calibration session agenda¶

# Performance Calibration: [Team/Org]

**Date:** [Date]
**Facilitator:** [Name]
**Attendees:** [Managers in the calibration group]

## Pre-work

- All reviews drafted before this meeting
- Each manager brings: name, proposed rating, 2-min summary

## Process

1. **Proposed distribution** (5 min)
   - Review proposed ratings as a group
   - Identify outliers and clusters

2. **Calibration discussions** (bulk of time)
   - Start with proposed "exceeds" and "does not meet"
   - Manager presents evidence; group discusses
   - Adjust if needed based on calibration

3. **Equity check** (10 min)
   - Any patterns by demographic?
   - Any concerns about consistency?

4. **Finalize** (5 min)
   - Lock ratings
   - Note any follow-ups

Performance improvement conversation script¶

"I need to have a direct conversation with you about your performance.

Over the past [time period], I've observed [specific issues]. For example,
[concrete example 1] and [concrete example 2].

This is below what I expect at your level. The impact is [consequences].

I want to help you improve, and I believe you can. Here's what I need to
see change: [specific expectations].

Let's meet [frequency] to check progress. I'll provide support by
[specific support]. But I need you to understand this is serious.

What questions do you have? What support do you need from me?"

Signals that performance management is working¶

Failure modes and mitigations¶

Equity in performance management¶

Performance reviews are particularly susceptible to bias. Protect against it:

• Clear criteria. Evaluate against defined expectations for the level, not gut feel.
• Evidence-based. Ratings backed by documented accomplishments and feedback.
• Calibration. Cross-manager review to catch inconsistencies.
• Audit outcomes. Track ratings by demographic. Look for patterns.
• Multiple perspectives. Peer feedback reduces single-rater bias.
• Structured process. Same process for everyone reduces procedural variance.

Related pages¶

• One-on-Ones — Where continuous feedback happens
• Feedback Frameworks — How to give feedback that lands
• Growth Plans — Connecting review feedback to development
• Succession Planning — Identifying and developing future leaders
• Diversity in Leadership — Equity in assessment and advancement