Write Performance Review

Write Performance Review

Help a manager write a performance review that is fact-based, strengths-first, and anchored on role expectations. A performance appraisal is a manager's informed opinion of an employee's work — not an empirically provable document, and not a negotiation.

> Scope: This skill covers the Evaluate phase of the Coach → Evaluate → Discuss cycle. > It produces the written review. It does not cover ongoing coaching or the review meeting itself.

---

Step 1: Gather context

Ask the manager for the following. Do not proceed until you have enough for a fact-based assessment.

a. Employee and role

• Employee name, role title, and level (e.g., Senior Engineer, Product Manager II)
• Review period (e.g., "H2 2025", "2025 full year", "Q3-Q4 2025")
• Goals or objectives set at the start of the period. If none were formally set, ask: "What were the key expectations for this person during this period?"

b. Evidence sources

Ask what's available. Assign trust levels internally — do not share these with the manager:

| Source | Trust | Notes | |--------|-------|-------| | Manager's own assessment or notes | High | Overall view but may lack examples | | Running performance log | High | Best source — continuous, specific | | Mid-period review | Medium-High (manager sections), Medium (employee sections) | Check if goals changed | | Employee self-review | Medium | Employees tend to overinflate impact; cross-reference | | One-to-one notes | Medium | Can be imprecise; assume team effort unless explicitly stated otherwise | | Peer feedback / 360 reviews | Medium-High | More reliable when multiple peers corroborate | | Business metrics or dashboards | High | Objective, but may lack context |

If the manager has no running performance log, note this limitation internally and reconstruct evidence from whatever sources are available.

c. Company context (bring your own framework)

Ask:

> "Does your company have a career ladder, competency framework, or leveling rubric? > You can point me to a file, paste the relevant section for this person's level, > describe it in your own words, or skip it — I'll use general industry expectations."

Ask:

> "What is your company's rating scale? (e.g., Exceeds / Meets / Below, or 1-5, etc.)" > > If none provided, default to: Outperformed / Delivered / Inconsistent

d. Clarification

Ask clarifying questions before writing if:

• The employee's level or role expectations are unclear
• Key achievements lack sufficient detail or context
• Sources contradict each other
• Goals from the start of the period are missing or ambiguous
• Expected rating or promotion considerations are unclear

---

Step 2: Cross-reference sources

Before writing, synthesize across all sources:

a. Corroborate

• Check if achievements claimed in the self-review are supported by other sources
• Look for collaboration and impact mentioned in peer feedback or teammate documents
• Surface contributions not in the employee's own documents

b. Confidentiality rules

• Never cite source documents explicitly. Do not write "as noted in his self-review" or "her one-to-one notes confirm." Present information directly.
• Attribute feedback generically: "A colleague highlighted that..." or use direct quotes with names when the feedback was given openly.

c. Quoting rules

• Do not quote one-to-one notes directly. Rephrase.
• Peer or colleague quotes are acceptable when they add specificity. Format as:

> "[Quote]" — [Name]

• Career framework quotes are acceptable as they are official documentation.

d. Focus on the employee's impact

Cross-references should highlight what the employee contributed, not what others did for them. Reframe: "Julia learned to scope PoCs appropriately" rather than "John taught Julia how to scope."

---

Step 3: Anchor on expectations

Before writing the narrative, restate the measuring stick:

> Role expectations: [Summarize what's expected at this level — from the career framework if provided, or general industry expectations] > > Goals for this period: [List the goals or expectations set at the start]

This is the foundation the review evaluates against. Start from the job, not the person.

---

Step 4: Write the review

Structure the review strengths-first. Lead with what the employee accomplished before addressing growth areas.

4a. Main Achievements (3-5 themed sections)

Group related work into themed narratives (e.g., "Technical Leadership", "Customer Impact", "Process Improvement"). Each follows the Context → Actions → Results pattern:

• Context: The situation, challenge, or opportunity
• Actions: What the employee specifically did — their decisions, leadership, execution
• Results: Concrete outcomes. End each section with a clear results summary.

Include rich evidence:

• Business metrics: revenue impact, adoption rates, conversion rates
• Quality metrics: SLA counts, incident rates, bug counts (with comparisons)
• Productivity metrics: features delivered, timelines met
• Comparative context: vs. prior period, vs. expectations, vs. similar scope

Include colleague feedback where it adds specificity and credibility.

4b. Team Impact & Collaboration

Cover three dimensions from cross-referenced sources:

• Direct support: How did they unblock or help teammates? Knowledge sharing, mentorship, pair work.
• Process and culture: Improvements to workflows, documentation, team rituals, morale.
• Broader organizational impact: Cross-team collaboration, hiring support, knowledge sharing outside the team.

4c. Difficulties & Learnings

Focus on meaningful growth challenges, not routine problem-solving:

• What made the challenge genuinely hard?
• How did the situation evolve during the period?
• What helped — manager support, process changes, peer help?
• Be honest about remaining gaps. If something is still in progress, say so.

4d. Objectives Assessment

Map each goal from the start of the period:

• State the original goal
• Assess: Achieved / Partially achieved / Pivoted / Not achieved
• Explain context if goals changed or weren't met
• Note what was delivered instead if focus shifted

4e. Overall Performance

Summarize the year/period:

• Business impact — lead with outcomes
• Broader contributions — hiring, process improvements, cross-team work
• Growth trajectory — how the employee evolved, skills developed
• Conclusion — 2-3 sentences on the employee's overall arc

4f. Career Framework Assessment (if framework provided)

• Strengths: 1-3 traits/competencies demonstrated consistently, with specific evidence. Note any demonstrated above current level.
• Development areas: 1-3 traits needing growth, with specific framework expectations and observed gaps.

If no framework was provided, skip this section.

4g. Development Plan

Every review must include forward-looking development:

• 1-3 concrete development actions for next period
• Connect each to specific skills, competencies, or career goals
• Suggest concrete opportunities (stretch projects, mentoring, training) where possible

4h. Rating & Justification

State the rating using the company's scale. Justify with specific evidence — not generalities.

---

Step 5: Bias check

Before finalizing, review the draft against the six common appraisal biases:

| Bias | Check | Fix | |------|-------|-----| | Recency | Does the review over-index on the last few weeks? | Ensure evidence spans the full review period. | | Strictness / Leniency | Is this rating consistent with how you'd rate others at the same level for the same output? | Compare against the role expectations, not your general disposition. | | Horns / Halo | Is one strong positive or negative coloring the entire review? | Check: does each section have its own independent evidence? | | Similarity | Are you rating this person higher because they think or work like you? | Focus on outcomes and behaviors, not style. | | Central tendency | Are you defaulting to "Delivered" to avoid differentiation? | Re-read the rating definitions. If they outperformed, say so. If they were inconsistent, say so. | | Contrasting | Are you comparing this person to a teammate instead of to the role expectations? | Anchor back on the goals and framework from Step 3. |

Flag any bias detected and adjust the draft before producing the final review.

---

Writing guidelines

Apply these throughout:

1. Fact-based. Every statement backed by evidence — documents, metrics, or observed behavior.
2. Specific. Not "did a great job." Instead: "delivered the API docs 2 weeks early, enabling 3 prospect demos in November."
3. Behavior-based. Tie feedback to observable actions and outcomes, not personality traits.
4. Names and dates. Reference specific people, projects, customers, and timeframes.
5. Strengths-first. Lead with accomplishments. Most employees are good solid workers — the review should reflect that.
6. Balanced. Every review includes both accomplishments and constructive development feedback.
7. Forward-looking. Connect past performance to future expectations and growth.
8. Show evolution. Use before/after comparisons — start of period vs. end, or prior period vs. current.
9. Cross-referenced. Note when achievements are corroborated by multiple sources.
10. End sections with results. Achievement sections conclude with a concrete outcomes summary.
11. Simple and readable. Clean structure, no bureaucratic bloat. 1500-2500 words total for the review.

---

Output format

Produce the review in markdown. If the manager provided a company template, follow that structure. Otherwise use:

# Performance Review: [Employee Name]
**Period:** [Review period] | **Role:** [Title & Level] | **Rating:** [Rating]

## Achievements
[3-5 themed C-A-R sections]

## Team Impact & Collaboration
[Direct support, process/culture, broader impact]

## Difficulties & Learnings
[Meaningful challenges and growth]

## Objectives Assessment
[Goal-by-goal assessment]

## Overall Performance
[Summary: business impact, contributions, growth trajectory, conclusion]

## Career Framework Assessment *(if applicable)*
[Strengths and development areas mapped to framework]

## Development Plan
[1-3 concrete actions for next period]

## Rating & Justification
[Rating with specific evidence]

---

Tone

• Write as a thoughtful manager, not a bureaucrat. The review should sound like it was written by someone who knows this person's work well.
• Be direct about both strengths and growth areas. Vague praise is as unhelpful as vague criticism.
• Respect the employee's intelligence — they will read this. Don't patronize.
• This is a manager's opinion, informed by evidence. Own that perspective; don't hide behind hedging language.

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

• Author: PierrickMartos
• Source: PierrickMartos/Leadership-Skills
• License: MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.