Skill: 1kalin/afrexai-performance-review (version 1.1.0)

# Performance Review Engine > Your AI-powered performance management system. Write reviews that develop people, not just evaluate them. From self-assessments to 360° feedback to calibration — complete frameworks for every review cycle. --- ## Quick Start Tell your agent: - "Write a performance review for [name] — they exceeded on delivery but need to improve communication" - "Help me write my self-assessment for H2 2025" - "Run a 360° feedback collection for my team of 6" - "Prepare calibration notes for my 4 direct reports" --- ## 1. Review Cycle Setup ### Cycle Configuration Template ```yaml cycle: name: "H2 2025 Performance Review" period: "2025-07-01 to 2025-12-31" type: annual | semi-annual | quarterly timeline: self_assessment_due: "2026-01-10" peer_feedback_due: "2026-01-17" manager_draft_due: "2026-01-24" calibration_session: "2026-01-28" delivery_window: "2026-01-29 to 2026-02-07" participants: - name: "" role: "" level: "" tenure_months: 0 previous_rating: "" peer_reviewers: [] skip_level_reviewer: "" rating_scale: 1: "Does Not Meet Expectations" 2: "Partially Meets Expectations" 3: "Meets Expectations" 4: "Exceeds Expectations" 5: "Significantly Exceeds Expectations" competencies: - name: "Delivery & Execution" weight: 30 - name: "Technical/Functional Expertise" weight: 25 - name: "Communication & Collaboration" weight: 20 - name: "Leadership & Influence" weight: 15 - name: "Growth & Development" weight: 10 ``` ### Rating Distribution Guidelines | Rating | Target % | Description | |--------|----------|-------------| | 5 - Significantly Exceeds | 5-10% | Transformational impact, raises the bar for everyone | | 4 - Exceeds | 20-25% | Consistently above expectations, visible impact | | 3 - Meets | 50-60% | Solid, reliable performer at level | | 2 - Partially Meets | 10-15% | Gaps in key areas, needs focused improvement | | 1 - Does Not Meet | 0-5% | Serious performance concerns, PIP candidate | **Forced distribution warning:** These are guidelines, not quotas. If a team genuinely has 80% high performers, the distribution should reflect reality. Forcing bell curves creates distrust. --- ## 2. Self-Assessment Framework ### STAR-I Method (Situation → Task → Action → Result → Impact) Guide employees to write self-assessments that actually demonstrate value: ```markdown ### Achievement: [Title] **Situation:** What was the context or challenge? **Task:** What was your specific responsibility? **Action:** What did you do? (Be specific — tools, approaches, decisions) **Result:** What was the measurable outcome? **Impact:** How did this affect the team/org/company beyond the immediate result? **Competency alignment:** [Which competency does this demonstrate?] **Evidence:** [Links, metrics, Slack messages, PRs, customer feedback] ``` ### Self-Assessment Prompts by Competency **Delivery & Execution:** - What were your top 3-5 deliverables this period? - Which projects were on time/budget? Which weren't, and why? - How did you handle blockers or scope changes? - What did you ship that you're most proud of? **Technical/Functional Expertise:** - What new skills or knowledge did you develop? - Where did you serve as the go-to expert? - What technical decisions did you make and what was the outcome? - How did you stay current in your field? **Communication & Collaboration:** - How did you contribute to team effectiveness? - Give an example of resolving a disagreement productively - How did you share knowledge with others? - What cross-functional work did you do? **Leadership & Influence:** - How did you influence outcomes beyond your direct responsibilities? - Did you mentor or develop others? How? - What initiatives did you drive or champion? - How did you contribute to team culture? **Growth & Development:** - What feedback did you receive and act on? - What's your biggest area of growth this period? - Where do you still want to improve? - What are your goals for next period? ### Self-Assessment Quality Checklist - [ ] Includes 5-8 concrete achievements with metrics - [ ] Uses STAR-I format (not just "I did X") - [ ] Covers all competency areas, not just delivery - [ ] Acknowledges at least 1-2 growth areas honestly - [ ] References specific feedback received and actions taken - [ ] Includes forward-looking goals - [ ] Avoids vague language ("helped with," "was involved in") - [ ] Links to evidence where possible - [ ] Appropriate length (1-2 pages, not 10) - [ ] Written in first person, professional but human tone --- ## 3. Manager Review Writing ### The OBSERVE Framework Structure every review around: **O — Outcomes delivered:** What did they ship/achieve? Metrics and evidence. **B — Behaviors demonstrated:** HOW they worked, not just what they produced. **S — Strengths to leverage:** Their superpower — what should they do MORE of? **E — Edges to develop:** Growth areas framed as opportunities, not failures. **R — Relationships & impact:** How they affected team dynamics and culture. **V — Vision forward:** Clear expectations and development plan for next period. **E — Evidence cited:** Every claim backed by specific examples. ### Writing Rules 1. **Specific > Vague** - ❌ "Great job this quarter" - ✅ "Led the API migration affecting 12 services, completing 2 weeks ahead of schedule with zero customer-facing incidents" 2. **Behavior > Trait** - ❌ "Is a natural leader" - ✅ "Organized weekly knowledge-sharing sessions that improved team velocity by 15% and reduced onboarding time for 3 new hires" 3. **Pattern > Incident** - ❌ "Missed the Q3 deadline" - ✅ "Delivery timelines were missed on 3 of 5 projects, consistently by 1-2 weeks, suggesting estimation needs improvement" 4. **Forward > Backward** - ❌ "Failed to communicate effectively" - ✅ "Strengthening stakeholder communication — specifically proactive status updates — would multiply the impact of their strong technical work" 5. **Balanced always** - Even top performers need development feedback - Even struggling performers have strengths to acknowledge - Target ratio: 60% strengths / 40% development (adjust by rating) ### Review Templates by Rating #### Rating 5 — Significantly Exceeds ```markdown ## Performance Review: [Name] — H2 2025 **Rating: Significantly Exceeds Expectations (5/5)** ### Summary [Name] delivered exceptional results this period, consistently operating above their current level. Their impact extended well beyond their role, influencing [team/org/company] outcomes in measurable ways. ### Key Achievements 1. **[Achievement]** — [STAR-I summary with metrics] 2. **[Achievement]** — [STAR-I summary with metrics] 3. **[Achievement]** — [STAR-I summary with metrics] ### Competency Assessment | Competency | Rating | Evidence | |-----------|--------|----------| | Delivery & Execution | 5 | [Specific examples] | | Technical Expertise | [X] | [Specific examples] | | Communication | [X] | [Specific examples] | | Leadership | [X] | [Specific examples] | | Growth | [X] | [Specific examples] | ### Strengths to Leverage - [Strength 1] — this is a differentiator that should be amplified - [Strength 2] — consider giving them a platform to share this more broadly ### Development Opportunities Even at this exceptional level, continued growth in [area] would unlock [next-level impact]. Specifically: - [Development area with actionable suggestion] - [Stretch assignment or learning recommendation] ### Forward Look [Name] is ready for [promotion/expanded scope/leadership opportunity]. Recommended next steps: [specific action]. ``` #### Rating 3 — Meets Expectations ```markdown ## Performance Review: [Name] — H2 2025 **Rating: Meets Expectations (3/5)** ### Summary [Name] delivered solid, reliable work this period, meeting the expectations of their role. They are a dependable contributor who [key positive theme]. ### Key Achievements 1. **[Achievement]** — [Evidence] 2. **[Achievement]** — [Evidence] 3. **[Achievement]** — [Evidence] ### Competency Assessment [Same table format] ### Strengths - [Strength 1 with evidence] - [Strength 2 with evidence] ### Development Areas To move from "meets" to "exceeds," [Name] should focus on: 1. **[Area]** — Currently [current state]. The gap is [specific gap]. To close it: [actionable steps]. 2. **[Area]** — [Same structure] ### Forward Look Goals for next period: 1. [Measurable goal tied to development area] 2. [Stretch goal that would demonstrate growth] 3. [Continuation goal building on strengths] ``` #### Rating 1-2 — Below Expectations ```markdown ## Performance Review: [Name] — H2 2025 **Rating: [Partially Meets / Does Not Meet] Expectations ([1-2]/5)** ### Summary [Name] struggled to meet expectations in key areas this period. While [acknowledge any positives], significant gaps in [areas] need to be addressed. ### Performance Gaps 1. **[Gap]** — Expected: [what was expected]. Actual: [what happened]. Impact: [business impact]. Examples: [2-3 specific instances]. 2. **[Gap]** — [Same structure] ### What Was Done Well - [Genuine positive — never skip this section] ### Context Considered - [Any mitigating factors: reorg, unclear expectations, personal circumstances] - [Whether support/coaching was provided and when] ### Improvement Plan | Area | Current State | Target State | Actions | Timeline | Support Needed | |------|--------------|-------------|---------|----------|----------------| | [Gap 1] | [Specific] | [Specific] | [Steps] | [Date] | [Resources] | | [Gap 2] | [Specific] | [Specific] | [Steps] | [Date] | [Resources] | ### Consequences If improvement to [specific measurable standard] is not demonstrated by [date]: - [Next step: PIP / role change / separation] ### Check-in Schedule - Weekly 1:1s focused on [areas] - 30-day checkpoint: [date] - 60-day checkpoint: [date] - Final assessment: [date] ``` --- ## 4. 360° Feedback System ### Peer Feedback Request Template ```markdown Hi [Peer Name], You're invited to provide feedback on [Employee Name] for our [H2 2025] review cycle. Please share your observations (10-15 min, ~200-400 words total): 1. **What does [Name] do well?** (Think: specific projects, behaviors, impact on you/the team) 2. **What could [Name] improve?** (Think: what would make them even more effective?) 3. **How would you describe working with [Name]?** (Collaboration style, communication, reliability) 4. **One thing [Name] should keep doing:** ___ 5. **One thing [Name] should start or do more of:** ___ Your feedback will be anonymized and synthesized — [Name] will not see your individual responses verbatim. Due by: [Date] ``` ### Feedback Synthesis Method When combining multiple peer reviews: 1. **Identify themes** — What do 2+ people mention? Those are patterns, not noise. 2. **Weight by proximity** — Feedback from close collaborators > occasional contacts. 3. **Separate fact from feeling** — "Missed 3 deadlines" is fact. "Seems disengaged" is perception (still valuable, but frame differently). 4. **Preserve outlier insights** — If one person noticed something unique, it may still be valuable. Include as "additionally noted." ### Synthesis Template ```markdown ### 360° Feedback Summary for [Name] **Respondents:** [N] peers, [N] cross-functional, [N] skip-level **Consistent Strengths (mentioned by 2+ reviewers):** - [Theme] — "[Representative quote]" (paraphrased from [N] responses) - [Theme] — "[Representative quote]" **Consistent Development Areas:** - [Theme] — "[Representative quote]" - [Theme] — "[Representative quote]" **Notable Individual Observations:** - [Unique insight worth including] **Overall Sentiment:** [Positive / Mixed / Concerning] **Collaboration Rating (aggregated):** [Strong / Solid / Needs Improvement] ``` --- ## 5. Calibration Session ### Pre-Calibration Prep For each direct report, prepare: ```yaml calibration_card: name: "" current_level: "" tenure: "" previous_rating: "" proposed_rating: "" rating_justification: "" # 2-3 sentences max top_achievement: "" biggest_gap: "" promotion_candidate: yes | no | not_yet flight_risk: low | medium | high key_question: "" # What you want the calibration group to weigh in on ``` ### Calibration Discussion Framework **Round 1 — Present (2 min per person)** - Manager presents: proposed rating, top achievement, biggest gap - No debate yet — just laying out the landscape **Round 2 — Calibrate (5 min per person where needed)** - Focus on: rating 4s and 5s (are they truly exceptional?), rating 1s and 2s (is this fair?), any rating that changed from last cycle - Ask: "Would this person get the same rating on another team?" - Ask: "Is this rating consistent with [comparable person]?" **Round 3 — Decide** - Finalize ratings - Flag anyone who needs skip-level review - Identify promotion candidates - Identify flight risks needing retention action ### Calibration Bias Checklist Before finalizing, check for: - [ ] **Recency bias** — Are you over-weighting the last month vs. the full period? - [ ] **Halo/horns effect** — Is one great/bad thing coloring the entire review? - [ ] **Similarity bias** — Are you rating people like you higher? - [ ] **Central tendency** — Are you avoiding extreme ratings when they're warranted? - [ ] **Leniency/strictness** — Is your distribution shifted vs. the org? - [ ] **Attribution error** — Are you blaming the person for systemic issues? - [ ] **Contrast effect** — Are you comparing to the previous person reviewed rather than the standard? --- ## 6. Review Delivery Conversation ### Conversation Structure (45-60 min) **Opening (5 min)** - Set the tone: "This is a two-way conversation, not a verdict" - Share the rating upfront — don't make them wait **Achievements (10 min)** - Walk through top 3-5 achievements - Let them add context or achievements you missed - Be genuinely appreciative — this isn't just preamble to criticism **Development (15 min)** - Present 1-2 development areas (not 10) - Use the pattern: "I've observed [specific behavior] in [specific situations]. The impact was [what happened]. What I'd love to see is [desired behavior]." - Ask: "Does this resonate? What's your perspective?" - Listen. Actually listen. **360° Themes (5 min)** - Share synthesized peer feedback - Highlight: "Your colleagues really value [X]" - Development: "A theme that came up was [Y] — thoughts?" **Goals & Development Plan (15 min)** - Co-create 3-5 goals for next period - At least 1 development goal, not just delivery goals - Identify specific actions, resources, support needed - Agree on check-in cadence **Close (5 min)** - Summarize key takeaways - Ask: "What do you need from me to be successful?" - End on forward-looking, supportive note ### Difficult Conversation Scripts **For underperformers:** "I want to be direct with you because I respect you and your potential here. Your performance this period was below what we need in [specific area]. Here's what I've observed... I want to work with you on a plan to get back on track. Are you willing to commit to that?" **For strong performers who didn't get promoted:** "Your work this period was excellent — [specific examples]. The reason you're rated [X] rather than promoted is [specific gap]. Here's what I think it would take: [concrete steps]. I'm committed to supporting you in getting there." **For someone who disagrees with their rating:** "I hear you, and I want to understand your perspective. Can you walk me through the specific areas where you see it differently? ... I appreciate you sharing that. Here's how I weighed [factors]. [Either: Let me take this back and reconsider / I understand the disagreement, but here's why the rating stands]." --- ## 7. Development Planning ### Development Plan Template ```yaml development_plan: employee: "" manager: "" period: "H1 2026" review_date: "" strengths_to_leverage: - strength: "" leverage_action: "" # How to use this more development_areas: - area: "" current_state: "" target_state: "" actions: - type: "on_the_job" # 70% of development description: "" timeline: "" - type: "learning" # 20% — coaching, mentoring, peer learning description: "" timeline: "" - type: "formal" # 10% — courses, certifications, conferences description: "" timeline: "" success_metrics: "" check_in_dates: [] career_goals: short_term: "" # 6-12 months medium_term: "" # 1-3 years long_term: "" # 3-5 years support_needed: from_manager: "" from_org: "" budget_required: "" ``` ### The 70-20-10 Development Mix | Type | % | Examples | |------|---|----------| | On-the-job | 70% | Stretch assignments, new projects, leading initiatives, cross-functional work, shadowing | | Social learning | 20% | Mentoring, coaching, peer feedback, communities of practice, teaching others | | Formal learning | 10% | Courses, certifications, conferences, books, structured programs | **Common mistake:** Over-indexing on formal learning (sending someone to a course) when on-the-job stretch would be 5x more effective. --- ## 8. Continuous Feedback (Between Reviews) ### 1:1 Performance Check-in Template (Monthly) ```markdown ## Monthly Check-in: [Name] — [Month Year] ### Progress on Goals | Goal | Status | Notes | |------|--------|-------| | [Goal 1] | 🟢 On track / 🟡 At risk / 🔴 Off track | [Brief update] | ### Recent Wins - [What went well this month] ### Challenges - [What's been difficult] ### Feedback Exchange - **Manager → Employee:** [One specific piece of feedback] - **Employee → Manager:** [Ask: "What can I do differently to support you?"] ### Action Items - [ ] [Action] — Owner: [who] — By: [date] ### Overall Pulse: 😊 Great / 😐 Fine / 😟 Struggling ``` ### Real-Time Feedback Formula (SBI) **Situation:** "In yesterday's client presentation..." **Behavior:** "...you handled the pricing objection by reframing around ROI rather than discounting..." **Impact:** "...which kept us at full price and the client visibly shifted from skeptical to interested." Deliver within 48 hours. Positive feedback publicly (if they're comfortable). Constructive feedback privately. Always. --- ## 9. Scoring & Analytics ### Individual Performance Score (0-100) ``` Score = Σ (competency_rating × competency_weight) × 20 Example: Delivery (4/5 × 30%) + Technical (3/5 × 25%) + Communication (4/5 × 20%) + Leadership (3/5 × 15%) + Growth (4/5 × 10%) = (1.20 + 0.75 + 0.80 + 0.45 + 0.40) = 3.60 / 5 = 72/100 ``` ### Team Health Dashboard Track quarterly: ```markdown ## Team Performance Dashboard — Q4 2025 **Team size:** [N] **Rating distribution:** ⭐5: [N] | ⭐4: [N] | ⭐3: [N] | ⭐2: [N] | ⭐1: [N] **Average score:** [X]/100 **vs. last period:** [↑/↓ X points] **Promotion candidates:** [Names] **Flight risks:** [Names + risk level] **PIP/coaching:** [Names] **Top team strengths:** [Competencies scoring highest] **Team gaps:** [Competencies scoring lowest] **Development budget used:** [X]% of [Y] allocated **Engagement signals:** - Voluntary turnover: [X]% - Internal mobility: [X] transfers/promotions - 1:1 completion rate: [X]% - Goal completion rate: [X]% ``` --- ## 10. Edge Cases & Advanced Scenarios ### New Hire (< 6 months) - Evaluate against onboarding milestones, not full role expectations - Weight learning speed and cultural integration higher - Compare to "expected ramp" not to tenured peers - Rating floor of 3 unless genuine performance issues (distinguish slow ramp from bad fit) ### Role Change Mid-Cycle - Split the review: first half in old role, second half in new - Weight the new role performance more heavily (it's the forward-looking signal) - Acknowledge the transition tax — expect a temporary dip ### Remote/Hybrid Considerations - Evaluate output and impact, not visibility or hours - Seek feedback from async collaborators, not just people in the office - Watch for proximity bias — don't rate in-office people higher by default ### High Performer Wanting to Leave - Have the conversation: "I value you and want to understand what would make you want to stay" - Don't inflate the rating as retention — it sets a precedent - Document the conversation and retention actions taken ### Inherited Team Member - Get context from previous manager (ask for their calibration card) - Be transparent: "I'm still building my understanding of your work" - Lean more on peer feedback and objective metrics - Don't default to "meets" because you don't know — do the research ### Manager Reviewing Someone They Don't Like - Stick to observable behaviors and measurable outcomes - Have a peer manager gut-check your review for bias - Ask yourself: "If my favorite team member did exactly this, what would I rate them?" --- ## 11. Legal & Compliance Notes **Documentation rules:** - Keep all review documents for minimum 3 years (7 in regulated industries) - Feedback must reference specific, observable behaviors — not personality traits - Never reference protected characteristics (age, gender, disability, etc.) - PIP documentation should be reviewed by HR/legal before delivery - Employee should sign acknowledging receipt (not agreement) **Phrases to avoid:** - "Cultural fit" (can mask bias) → Use "collaboration effectiveness" - "Aggressive" (gendered connotation) → Use "assertive" or "direct" - "Young/energetic" → Use specific behaviors - "Not a team player" → Cite specific collaboration gaps with examples --- ## Commands Reference | Command | What it does | |---------|-------------| | "Start review cycle for [team]" | Creates cycle config with timeline | | "Write self-assessment for [achievements]" | Generates STAR-I formatted self-review | | "Write review for [name] — rating [X]" | Full manager review using OBSERVE framework | | "Collect 360 feedback for [name]" | Generates peer feedback requests | | "Synthesize feedback from [sources]" | Combines multiple inputs into themes | | "Prepare calibration for [team]" | Creates calibration cards for all reports | | "Create development plan for [name]" | Builds 70-20-10 development plan | | "Monthly check-in for [name]" | Generates 1:1 template with goal tracking | | "Give feedback on [situation]" | Formats using SBI framework | | "Score [name] across competencies" | Calculates weighted performance score | | "Team health dashboard" | Generates full team analytics view |

path: README.md
content: # AfrexAI Performance Review Engine 🖤💛

The complete AI-powered performance management system. Write better reviews, run calibration sessions, collect 360° feedback, and develop your people — all through your AI agent.

## What This Does

- **Self-assessments** using STAR-I framework (not vague bullet points)
- **Manager reviews** using the OBSERVE method with templates for every rating level
- **360° feedback** collection, anonymization, and synthesis
- **Calibration sessions** with bias checklists and discussion frameworks
- **Development plans** using the 70-20-10 model
- **Continuous feedback** with SBI formula and monthly check-in templates
- **Performance scoring** — weighted competency scores (0-100) and team dashboards
- **Edge cases** — new hires, role changes, remote workers, inherited teams, difficult conversations

## Install

```bash
clawhub install afrexai-performance-review
```

## Quick Start

```
"Write a performance review for Sarah — she exceeded on delivery and technical work, 
but needs to improve cross-functional communication. Rating: 4/5."

"Help me write my self-assessment. Key achievements: led API migration (12 services, 
2 weeks early), mentored 2 junior devs, reduced incident response time by 40%."

"Prepare calibration cards for my 5 direct reports."
```

## What's Inside

| Section | What You Get |
|---------|-------------|
| Cycle Setup | Full YAML config template with timeline, competencies, rating scale |
| Self-Assessment | STAR-I method, prompts by competency, quality checklist |
| Manager Reviews | OBSERVE framework, templates for ratings 1-5, writing rules |
| 360° Feedback | Request templates, synthesis method, theme extraction |
| Calibration | Prep cards, discussion framework, 7-point bias checklist |
| Delivery | Conversation structure, scripts for difficult situations |
| Development | 70-20-10 plans, career goal templates, support mapping |
| Continuous | Monthly check-in template, SBI feedback formula |
| Scoring | Weighted performance scores, team health dashboard |
| Edge Cases | New hires, role changes, remote, inherited teams, legal notes |

## ⚡ Level Up Your HR & People Operations

This free skill covers performance reviews. For a **complete recruitment and people management system** — including sourcing, screening, interviewing, offer negotiation, onboarding, and retention:

👉 [**AfrexAI Recruitment Context Pack — $47**](https://afrexai-cto.github.io/context-packs/)

45+ files of battle-tested frameworks that turn your AI agent into a full HR department.

## 🔗 More Free Skills by AfrexAI

- **[afrexai-recruiting-engine](https://clawhub.com/skills/afrexai-recruiting-engine)** — Full recruiting pipeline from sourcing to offer
- **[afrexai-lead-hunter](https://clawhub.com/skills/afrexai-lead-hunter)** — ICP-based lead generation with scoring
- **[afrexai-meeting-mastery](https://clawhub.com/skills/afrexai-meeting-mastery)** — Meeting prep, follow-up, and ROI tracking
- **[afrexai-customer-support](https://clawhub.com/skills/afrexai-customer-support)** — Ticket triage, CSAT, churn prevention
- **[afrexai-business-automation](https://clawhub.com/skills/afrexai-business-automation)** — Workflow design and process automation

📦 **Browse all AfrexAI skills & context packs:** [afrexai-cto.github.io/context-packs](https://afrexai-cto.github.io/context-packs/)


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: clean (LOW)