Rethinking The Annual Performance Review Process
Performance appraisals, performance reviews, performance evaluations. Whatever we call them, they can have a special knack for instilling dread in the hearts and minds of employees. I would get physically ill when my managers scheduled my annual performance review. I wanted feedback, but I was also anxious about whatever surprise commentary might come out of a meeting that covered an entire year of my work. One conversation. Twelve months. I couldn’t remember what I had for lunch the day before, how could I remember a year’s worth of work? It didn’t make sense, especially when managers were trying to recognize good performance and change behavior for the better.
Performance feedback should be ongoing, not a one-time event.
People often say the annual review process is “broken.” I wouldn’t go that far; I will say it’s outdated and has a lot of room for improvement. Annual reviews are slow, stressful, and wildly inefficient. I’ve had managers who gave feedback in real time and managers who waited a full year to tell me how I was doing. Guess which ones helped me improve?
The biggest flaw in annual reviews is timing. Feedback that arrives a year late is basically a history lesson. Add complicated forms, rating scales, and unconscious bias, and it’s no wonder the process misses the mark. Some managers hand out high scores to avoid conflict. Others give low ones because “nobody’s a 5.” Either way, employees are left confused instead of motivated.
I can’t talk about Annual Performance Reviews without talking about the time investment. Annual reviews take hours to prepare yet rarely deliver meaningful insight, it’s just another box that managers need to check. Employees feel the inefficiency, too. Nearly 80% say they’d rather receive frequent, informal feedback than suffer through a once-a-year review.
I’m one of them.
I’ve worked for managers who sat down with me, talked honestly about my performance, and helped me set clear goals. I’ve also had managers who avoided reviews altogether and offered a vague, “You’re doing great.” Nice words, but completely useless if I’m trying to grow or contribute more effectively.
Employees need feedback they can use. They need to know what they’re doing well and where they’re underperforming. They need feedback they can act upon.
I’m a big proponent in Continuous Performance Management (CPM).
CPM replaces the dreaded annual review with short, focused, future-looking conversations, usually quarterly. Less paperwork. More dialogue. More impact. The goal isn’t to rehash the past; it’s to focus on the future.
When I use CPM, I ask the employee three questions:
What should you start doing?
What should you stop doing?
What should you continue doing?
We set realistic goals that support the business and the employee. And finally, we’d add one outrageous goal. The kind that stretches people, sparks creativity, and pushes them to think bigger.
Those outrageous goals? They were often the most powerful. Even when employees didn’t fully hit them, progress was made. Confidence grew. The business moved forward.
Continuous Performance Management works because it’s human. It creates ongoing communication, aligns individual and organizational goals, and keeps employees engaged. Managers coach instead of judge. Employees know where they stand, where they’re headed, and how they’re contributing to the success of the company.
Let’s Talk
If your performance review process feels heavy, outdated, or ineffective, it might be time for a change. Continuous Performance Management doesn’t require expensive software or endless forms. It does require a shift in mindset and consistency.
If you’re ready to modernize performance conversations and help your managers give better feedback (without the dread), let’s talk. I work with organizations to create a performance management process that’s practical, people-focused, and works.
👉 Reach out to start the conversation.
