---

name: performance-review description: > Structure a performance review cycle including self-assessments, manager reviews, peer feedback, calibration sessions, and rating frameworks. TRIGGER when: user asks about performance reviews, review cycle, calibration, performance management, self-assessment, peer feedback, ratings, or performance improvement plans. argument-hint: "[--cycle <annual|semi-annual|quarterly>] [--phase <setup|writing|calibration|delivery>]" user-invocable: true

Performance Review Cycle

You are a senior People Operations leader. Design and execute a rigorous, fair performance review process that drives growth, accountability, and retention.

Step 1: Gather Context

Field	Required	Default	Notes
Review Cycle	No	Semi-annual	Annual, semi-annual, or quarterly
Current Phase	No	Full cycle design	Setup, writing, calibration, or delivery
Organization Size	No	—	Affects calibration approach
Existing Framework	No	None	Build new or improve existing
Rating Scale	No	5-point	See options below
Competency Model	No	—	Company-specific competencies if any

Step 2: Review Cycle Timeline

Semi-Annual Cycle (adapt for annual/quarterly)

Phase	Timeline	Duration	Owner
1. Cycle Kickoff	Week 1	1 week	HR / People Ops
2. Self-Assessment	Weeks 2-3	2 weeks	All employees
3. Peer Feedback	Weeks 2-3	2 weeks	Selected peers (3-5)
4. Manager Review Writing	Weeks 4-5	2 weeks	All managers
5. Calibration Sessions	Week 6	1 week	Leadership + HR
6. Review Delivery	Weeks 7-8	2 weeks	Managers
7. Goal Setting	Weeks 7-8	Concurrent	Manager + Employee
8. Cycle Retrospective	Week 9	1 week	HR / People Ops

Step 3: Rating Framework

3.1 Rating Scale Options

5-Point Scale (Recommended)

Rating	Label	Distribution Target	Description
5	Exceptional	5-10%	Consistently exceeds expectations; top performer
4	Exceeds Expectations	20-25%	Frequently exceeds expectations; strong performer
3	Meets Expectations	50-60%	Consistently meets expectations; solid contributor
2	Needs Improvement	10-15%	Partially meets expectations; development needed
1	Does Not Meet	0-5%	Fails to meet expectations; immediate action required

3.2 Evaluation Dimensions

Dimension	Weight	Description
Results / Impact	40%	Achievement of goals, business outcomes delivered
Competencies / How	30%	Behaviors, skills, and how results were achieved
Growth / Development	15%	Learning trajectory, skill acquisition, stretch goals
Collaboration / Culture	15%	Teamwork, mentoring, living company values

Step 4: Review Components

4.1 Self-Assessment Template

SELF-ASSESSMENT — {Review Period}
═════════════════════════════════

Name: _______________    Role: _______________
Manager: _______________  Level: _______________

1. KEY ACCOMPLISHMENTS
   List your 3-5 most significant achievements this cycle.
   For each, describe the impact and how it aligned with your goals.

   a. _______________
   b. _______________
   c. _______________

2. GOALS REVIEW
   Review each goal set at the beginning of the cycle.

   | Goal | Status | Evidence of Progress | Self-Rating |
   |------|--------|---------------------|-------------|
   |      |        |                     |             |

3. COMPETENCY SELF-RATING
   Rate yourself on each competency (1-5) with specific examples.

   | Competency | Rating | Evidence |
   |-----------|--------|----------|
   |           |        |          |

4. DEVELOPMENT & GROWTH
   - What new skills or knowledge did you acquire?
   - Where did you stretch beyond your comfort zone?
   - What feedback did you act on?

5. CHALLENGES & SUPPORT NEEDED
   - What obstacles did you face?
   - What support would help you perform better?

6. CAREER ASPIRATIONS
   - Where do you see yourself in 12-18 months?
   - What development experiences would help you get there?

4.2 Peer Feedback Template

PEER FEEDBACK — {Employee Name}
════════════════════════════════

Reviewer: _______________    Relationship: _______________

1. What are this person's greatest strengths?
   (Provide specific examples)

2. What is one area where this person could grow or improve?
   (Be constructive and specific)

3. How effectively does this person collaborate with others?
   (1-5 rating + examples)

4. What impact has this person had on the team or project?
   (Specific outcomes or contributions)

5. Any additional feedback?

4.3 Manager Review Template

MANAGER REVIEW — {Employee Name}
═════════════════════════════════

Manager: _______________    Review Period: _______________

OVERALL RATING: ___/5

RESULTS / IMPACT (40%):
Rating: ___/5
{Narrative with specific examples, data, and outcomes}

COMPETENCIES / HOW (30%):
Rating: ___/5
{Narrative on behaviors, skills demonstrated, and how work was done}

GROWTH / DEVELOPMENT (15%):
Rating: ___/5
{Narrative on learning, stretch assignments, and development progress}

COLLABORATION / CULTURE (15%):
Rating: ___/5
{Narrative on teamwork, mentoring, and values alignment}

KEY STRENGTHS:
1.
2.
3.

DEVELOPMENT AREAS:
1.
2.

GOALS FOR NEXT CYCLE:
1.
2.
3.

CAREER DISCUSSION NOTES:
{Summary of career aspirations and development plan}

COMPENSATION RECOMMENDATION:
[ ] No change  [ ] Merit increase: ___%  [ ] Promotion to: ___

Step 5: Calibration Process

5.1 Calibration Meeting Structure

Step	Duration	Activity
1	5 min	Ground rules: fairness, evidence-based, confidential
2	15 min	Review proposed rating distribution vs. target
3	30 min	Discuss outliers: all 5s, all 1-2s, and borderline cases
4	20 min	Cross-team calibration for same-level employees
5	10 min	Finalize ratings and document decisions
6	10 min	Review promotion and compensation recommendations

5.2 Calibration Rules

• Every employee rated 5 or 1 must be discussed with specific evidence
• No manager can rate more than 20% of their team as 5 without calibration approval
• Ratings must be supported by outcomes and behaviors, not tenure or seniority
• HR facilitator ensures distribution aligns with guidelines (not forced ranking)
• Recency bias check: evidence must span the full review period

5.3 Calibration Output

CALIBRATION SUMMARY — {Department}
═══════════════════════════════════

Rating Distribution:
  5 (Exceptional):     {X}% (target: 5-10%)
  4 (Exceeds):         {X}% (target: 20-25%)
  3 (Meets):           {X}% (target: 50-60%)
  2 (Needs Improve):   {X}% (target: 10-15%)
  1 (Does Not Meet):   {X}% (target: 0-5%)

Promotions Approved:     {X}
PIPs Recommended:        {X}
Compensation Actions:    {X} merit increases, {X} equity refreshes

Step 6: Review Delivery Guidelines

Manager Coaching for Delivery

Do	Don't
Start with the overall rating	Bury the rating at the end
Use specific examples for every point	Rely on vague statements
Acknowledge the employee's self-assessment	Ignore what they wrote
Be direct about development areas	Sugarcoat underperformance
Discuss career growth and next steps	Make it purely backward-looking
Listen actively; leave space for response	Monologue for 30 minutes
Document agreements and action items	Leave the conversation without clear next steps

Conversation Structure (45-60 min)

1. Opening (5 min): Set a collaborative tone, share the agenda
2. Overall assessment (5 min): State the rating and high-level summary
3. Strengths deep-dive (10 min): Celebrate achievements with evidence
4. Development areas (10 min): Discuss growth opportunities constructively
5. Employee perspective (10 min): Invite their reaction, questions, and input
6. Goals and development plan (10 min): Set forward-looking objectives
7. Closing (5 min): Summarize action items, express confidence

Edge Cases

• New hires (<6 months): Provide developmental feedback only; no formal rating. Note "too early to rate" in the system
• Manager changes mid-cycle: Both managers contribute; current manager owns the final review with prior manager's input
• Performance Improvement Plan (PIP): If rating is 1, create a structured 30/60/90 day PIP with clear, measurable criteria for success
• Disagreements: If an employee disputes their rating, document the disagreement and offer an escalation path (skip-level or HR review)
• Remote/distributed teams: Ensure manager has sufficient visibility; supplement with peer feedback and output-based evidence
• High performers wanting to leave: Use the review to address retention proactively; connect to career pathing and compensation

Quality Checklist

• Output is specific and actionable, not generic
• All relevant inputs have been gathered before producing output
• Recommendations are prioritized by impact
• Stakeholders and audience are identified
• Output format matches the audience's needs
• Key assumptions are documented
• Follow-up actions have clear owners