Stimmen in der Führung • 7 MIN LESEN
The Future of Performance Reviews: What I Have Learned From Leading Them
APR 8, 2026
Nach dreimaliger Neugestaltung des Performance-Review-Prozesses in acht Jahren teilt eine People-Führungskraft, was sie heute weiß und sich gewünscht hätte, von Anfang an gewusst zu haben.
Was sich nicht ändert
I have tried annual reviews, quarterly reviews, no formal reviews, continuous feedback only, and various hybrids. The format matters much less than I once thought. What does not change is the importance of honest, specific, timely feedback: regardless of the system, employees want to know how they are doing, where they stand, and what they need to do to progress. Any process that reliably produces that conversation will work. Any process that avoids it will fail, regardless of how well-designed it is on paper.
Die Lektion zur Kalibrierung
The most impactful single change I have made to any performance process was introducing calibration sessions. Before calibration, our performance ratings were largely a reflection of manager generosity rather than employee performance. A 4 out of 5 from one manager meant something completely different from a 4 out of 5 from another. Calibration did not eliminate subjectivity, but it reduced rating variance significantly and made the distribution more meaningful. It also created a forum for managers to share what their highest and lowest performers were actually doing, which transferred good practice across the organisation.
