performance-management

Files (4)

• README.md
• SKILL.md
• evals.json
• career-ladder-template.md · references/

SKILL.md (first lines)

## Key principles

1. **Continuous feedback, not annual surprise** - Annual reviews should contain
   zero surprises. If the review is the first time someone hears a concern, the
   system has already failed. Build feedback into weekly 1:1s, quarterly check-ins,
   and project retrospectives so the formal review is a summary, not a revelation.

2. **OKRs are aspirational, not quotas** - An OKR system where 100% completion
   is expected destroys ambition. Objectives should be stretch goals; hitting 70%
   of a hard OKR is often better than hitting 100% of an easy one. Never tie OKR
   completion directly to compensation - it incentivizes sandbagging.

3. **Calibration ensures fairness, not uniformity** - Different managers have
   different rating tendencies (hawks vs. doves). Calibration sessions align rating
   standards across teams so that a "Meets Expectations" in one org means the same
   thing in another. The goal is consistency, not forcing a bell curve.

4. **Career ladders clarify expectations** - Employees should never have to guess
   what promotion requires. A career ladder makes expectations explicit: here is
   what impact, scope, technical skill, and leadership look like at each level.
   Ambiguity in ladders breeds favoritism in promotions.

5. **PIPs are a last resort, not a first response** - A PIP should never be a
   surprise. It follows documented coaching, informal feedback, and clear warnings.
   A well-run PIP has specific, measurable milestones, a realistic timeline (60-90
   days), and genuine organizational support. Its goal is improvement, not
   documentation for termination.

---

## Core concepts

### OKR hierarchy

```
Company OKRs (annual)
  |
  +-- Department OKRs (quarterly)
        |
        +-- Team OKRs (quarterly)
              |
              +-- Individual OKRs (quarterly, optional)
```

Each level's Key Results should ladder up to the level above. An individual KR
that does not connect to a team or company OKR is a signal that the work is
misaligned or the OKR system is not being used correctly.

**OKR anatomy:**

```
Objective:   Qualitative, inspiring, time-bound.
             "Make our checkout experience the fastest in the industry by Q4"

Key Results: Quantitative, binary-scoreable (0.0-1.0), 3-5 per Objective.
             KR1: Reduce median checkout latency from 2.1s to 0.8s
             KR2: Increase checkout completion rate from 71% to 85%
             KR3: Reduce cart abandonment on mobile from 62% to 45%
```

### Review cycles

| Cycle | Cadence | Participants | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1:1 | Weekly | Manager + IC | Ongoing coaching notes |
| Mid-cycle check-in | Quarterly | Manager + IC | OKR progress, early flag |
| Peer feedback | Semi-annual | 3-5 peers per person | Structured written feedback |
| Self-assessment | Semi-annual | Individual | Written self-reflection |
| Manager review | Semi-annual | Manager | Performance rating + narrative |
| Calibration | Semi-annual | Manager cohort | Normalized ratings |
| Compensation review | Annual | HR + leadership | Salary and equity decisions |

### Calibration process

```
Phase 1 - Pre-work (1 week before):
  Managers submit draft ratings and written justifications.
  HR compiles rating distribution by team and level.

Phase 2 - Calibration session (2-3 hours):
  Facilitator shares distribution. Outliers discussed first.
  Each manager defends any rating 2+ steps from cohort median.
  Ratings adjusted by consensus, not by committee override.

Phase 3 - Post-calibration (1 week after):
  Final ratings locked. Managers deliver feedback to ICs.
  Promotions and compensation decisions proceed from locked ratings.
```

### Career ladder dimensions

Most effective ladders evaluate four dimensions consistently across all levels:

| Dimension | What it measures |
|---|---|
| Technical skill | Depth and breadth of domain knowledge and execution quality |
| Scope of impact | Size of the problem space owned (self, team, org, company) |
| Autonomy | How much direction is needed to produce high-quality work |
| Leadership | Mentorship, cross-team influence, and culture contribution |

---

## Common tasks

### Design an OKR system

**Setup checklist:**

```
1. Define the cadence: annual company OKRs, quarterly team OKRs.
2. Set the hierarchy: company -> department -> team. ICs optional.
3. Write the Objective: inspiring, qualitative, owner assigned.
4. Write Key Results: measurable, 0.0-1.0 scoreable, 3-5 per Objective.
5. Mid-quarter check-in: score progress (0.0-1.0). Flag blocked KRs early.
6. End-of-quarter score: score final. Write retrospective (what worked, what did not).
```

**Scoring convention:**

From mkurman/zorai, MIT.

More from mkurman/zorai