Congrats to all who have just exited the performance review cycle!
For many in tech, performance reviews happen twice a year. They are a long and draining process that few truly understand. Despite the dread that comes with writing self-assessments and peer feedback, performance reviews are the single most important process one must master to succeed in tech. This process applies not only to tech but also to any industry.
One of the key learnings I’ve realized is that performance reviews are over before they even start. Performance review is a continuous process, not a single event that is always dreaded.
What is a Performance Review?
In plain terms, a performance review is when one’s work and growth over a specific period are evaluated. In most tech companies, this happens twice a year and spans an entire quarter. For individual contributors, it’s a 4-week process, but for managers, it’s a quarter-long grind involving extensive review and calibration of talent. Managers spend weeks reviewing details of individuals across teams and pillars. For those up for promotion, managers have to present “the packet,” a well-defined document with supporting artifacts and endorsements for the individual. It is extremely rigorous, given the high compensation in the tech industry, and companies are becoming increasingly diligent in reviewing the performance of their employees.
Understanding the Mechanics
Through the review process, all employees receive a “rating” equivalent to a scale of 1–5, with 3 being the most common rating. For example, at Instacart, CME or Consistently Meets Expectations is a 3, while MS or Meets Some is a 2. Most tech companies determine employee ratings through a calibration process involving a panel of managers. It is uncommon for the direct manager to be the sole determiner of an individual’s assessment. The manager provides their initial point of view, but the calibration process determines the final rating.
Employees are calibrated against others within their same level to assess relative performance. For example, an L6 product manager will be compared against other L6 product managers in terms of their impact and core competencies. Similar to university grading, the calibration process is on a curve, so not everyone can get an A. After calibration, the rating is mapped against guidelines provided by the compensation committee for raises, equity, or bonus determination. This separation allows the calibration to be unbiased and focused solely on performance assessment.
Common Mistakes Going Into Performance Review
Unaware of Recency Bias: Performance review is a continuous process, but recency bias is real. One of the most common mistakes is going into the review with unresolved negative projects or last impressions that could’ve been rectified.
Assuming Managers Know the Details of Impact: It is often said that only individuals are responsible for their careers and growth. This is especially true as tech managers are taking on more headcounts. Managers will never operate with the same level of information as the individual, and it is the individual’s responsibility to ensure managers are on the same page well before the performance review. It’s unrealistic to expect a manager to truly digest all the impact during the performance review if they haven’t heard about it throughout the year.
Not Enough Data and Too Much Qualitative Fluff: Impact is the indisputable input for performance review, and in tech, there is a strong bias towards impact and data. Qualitative competencies are secondary. It’s a mistake to think a good rating will be received just because someone is “a great person” to work with but delivers no impact.
Zero Engagement with Leaders in the Calibration Panel: It is a mistake to think that the calibration process is completely objective. First impressions or engagements with leaders outside the calibration process mean a lot. Acknowledging this as a subjective factor in the performance review and capitalizing on the opportunities to interact with leaders is crucial.
Tactics to Optimize for Any Performance Review
Plan a Roadmap with Monthly Reviews with the Manager: Just like a product-building process, the best way to plan for a performance review is to work backward and start early. Clearly define what the narrative should be by the time of the review and have a weekly/monthly roadmap towards that. Review with the manager monthly to assess progress and adjust as needed.
Be Intentional About What Type of Impact/Data to Share by Review Time: Ensure that the team’s goals/impact are being met. The best way to achieve this is to start planning and work backward. For example, at Instacart, a goal of delivering $35m in GMV (gross merchandise value) impact required diligence in structuring the roadmap and launches so that the impact could be realized before the performance review.
Create Opportunities to Engage with Other Leaders (Especially Those in the Calibration Panel): Be proactive in over-communicating in various forums. Examples include providing input in relevant high-stakes meetings, posting Slack updates, participating in cross-pillar product reviews, joining brown bag sessions, and volunteering to teach masterclasses. The untold truth is that setting the first impression outside of the review cycle goes a long way. It’s not ideal for someone in the room to say, “Oh wow, I never heard of this person; it seems like they are doing great work.”
Conclusion
Performance reviews in tech are not just about the few weeks leading up to the assessment but a continuous, year-long process of showcasing impact, engaging with leaders, and strategic planning. By understanding the mechanics, avoiding common pitfalls, and implementing optimization tactics, one can navigate the performance review cycle with confidence and success. Remember, career growth is in one’s hands, and mastering performance reviews is a crucial step in that journey.
