# Review Performance and Contribution

Status: draft · v0.1.0 · Performance and Development System
draft reference — not a fitted standard

Reach a fair, evidence-based view of contribution across the actual expectations, context, support, and changes that governed the review period.

## Purpose
Create an explainable performance conclusion and useful forward decisions without letting recency, personality, one metric, or an undocumented standard substitute for the whole record.

## Steps
1. Assemble the governed review record — Establish the expectations and evidence that legitimately apply.
2. Invite the role holder’s account — Add work knowledge, results, context, learning, and disagreement before manager judgment closes.
3. Evaluate contribution against the agreement — Form a whole-record judgment using the standards that actually applied.
4. Calibrate interpretation and consistency — Test standards and reasoning across comparable decisions without forcing false sameness.
5. Approve the review conclusion — Create one authorized contribution record without absorbing downstream decisions.
6. Discuss and acknowledge the review — Create shared understanding without requiring agreement as a condition of voice.
7. Route decisions and improve the system — Turn the review into controlled forward action and process learning.

## Connections
- upstream: Run Manager Check-ins and Feedback (/processes/run-manager-check-ins) — trigger: The authorized formal review point occurs.
- upstream: Align Role Outcomes and Expectations (/processes/align-role-outcomes) — trigger: The review record is assembled.
- downstream: Build and Operate a Development Plan (/processes/build-and-operate-development-plan) — trigger: Development is an accepted forward implication.
- downstream: Make a Progression or Talent Decision (/processes/make-progression-or-talent-decision) — trigger: A separate talent decision is authorized.

## Measures
- Review decision usefulness: Structured review of understanding, accepted handoffs, and subsequent action quality; not agreement or rating distribution alone.
- Material conclusion evidence coverage: Material conclusions with traceable expectation, evidence, context, and limitation divided by all material conclusions.
- Review cycle time: Elapsed time by stage, separating evidence, manager, calibration, approval, and discussion waits.
- Controlled review-method use: Completed reviews satisfying the active method divided by all completed reviews.
- Review exception pattern: Exceptions by type, manager, process stage, severity, cause, and disposition.
- Fairness, dignity, privacy, and surprise guardrail: Qualified review of conclusions, evidence, corrections, responses, access, handoffs, and participant feedback; not a causal or legal conclusion.