Checklist: Improving Performance Review Instruments

Use the following checklist to identify and reduce subtle biases in performance review instruments. These items are based on the best evidence from research on patterns in performance evaluation.

Are all of the performance criteria clearly defined? Are the standards for “what counts” as excellence in each criterion clear (e.g. “excellence includes the following kinds of accomplishments”)?

Are all of the performance criteria/standards important for doing the job well? Are there any missing criteria? Are there any extraneous criteria that are not really related to performance?

Do the criteria or questions allow for a range of communication or work styles as long as results are being delivered?

Do the criteria or questions focus on specific behaviors and accomplishments rather than inviting raters to list (positive or negative) personality traits? Sticking to behaviors and accomplishments avoids subtle biases in assessment about employee’s personalities or personal characteristics.

Do any of the criteria or questions include assumptions that unfairly advantage or disadvantage certain employee groups (e.g., those who work flexible hours or from home, etc.)?

Do any of the criteria or questions use ambiguous (and potentially biased) terms like “assertiveness,” “strong leadership,” “risk-taking?” If these are important to keep, does the instrument give specific examples of how these characteristics show up (e.g., “strong leadership” can include behaviors like ‘taking charge,’ but also can include bringing team members together, helping to solve or reduce misunderstandings)? Adding these kinds of examples helps ensure that “strong leadership” reflects a diverse range of effective leadership styles.

Before and/or after completing the evaluation, is the evaluator encouraged to reflect on his or her own potential biases that may be in play? (A section may be included in the evaluation tool for this purpose.)

Do the criteria or questions allow recognition for involvement in mentoring other employees or other kinds of efforts to improve organizational culture? If inclusive culture efforts are to be more than lip service or token efforts, companies need to give credit to managers and employees in performance evaluations, the same way they might do for other kinds of service to the organization. Otherwise, employees, especially those from underrepresented groups who often are asked to take on these activities, run the risk of being penalized for this participation.

Do managers’ performance evaluations include consideration of how well and inclusively they are leading the team? To be clear, do NOT tie manager’s performance evaluation to meeting numerical hiring or promotion goals (e.g., quotas). But evaluating managers on their ability to run an inclusive team (e.g., pay attention to whose voices are heard in meetings, that opportunities are open to all team members) is important.