Complete a Full Performance Review Cycle
12 weeks · 3 milestones
Run end-to-end reviews: calibration, written assessments, delivery, and follow-through.
Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
A performance review cycle is an organisational management system: it clarifies expectations (what does good performance look like for this role?), captures evidence of performance over a period (what did this person accomplish, and how?), provides calibration (are assessments consistent across managers?), and produces actionable conclusions (what changes, what stays the same, what does this person need to grow?). The design phase must produce a framework that covers all four components before the cycle begins. Designing the cycle after starting it produces inconsistent assessments and contested decisions.
Proof required
Submit: (1) a performance review framework: the review period, the performance dimensions being assessed (2–4 specific dimensions with operational definitions — e.g. 'Technical Execution: quality and reliability of code shipped to production, measured by incident rate and review round-trips'), the rating scale with definitions for each level, and the calibration process (who reviews ratings for consistency before they are finalised); (2) a template for written performance assessments: the sections each manager fills in for each direct report, including supporting evidence requirements; (3) the communication plan: how and when assessments will be shared with employees, and what follow-up actions are expected after delivery.
What gets checked
- Performance dimensions have operational definitions — 'communication' is not an operational dimension; 'Communication: clarity of written and verbal updates in project meetings and async channels, as assessed by cross-functional partners' is operational; definitions must be specific enough that two managers would assess the same person consistently
- Rating scale has level descriptions, not just labels — 'Exceeds Expectations' is a label; 'Exceeds Expectations: delivers the stated outputs with consistently lower defect rates than the team average AND actively identifies and resolves adjacent problems not originally in scope' is a level description
- Calibration process names participants and decision rules — 'managers will calibrate' is not a process; 'all people managers will attend a 90-minute calibration session where each manager presents their highest and lowest ratings with evidence, and any rating that differs from peer assessment by more than one level requires written justification' is a calibration process
Resources
Enroll free to unlock learning resources →Mastery
GitLab Handbook — Performance Reviews
Go further: a complete operational reference for running a performance review cycle with calibration.
Unlocks after completing Foundation + Depth