name: performance-management version: "2.0.0" description: Master performance management, goal-setting, OKRs, reviews, feedback, and metrics for engineering teams sasmp_version: "1.3.0" bonded_agent: 03-hiring-performance-agent bond_type: PRIMARY_BOND category: performance input_validation: required_context: ["review_type"] optional_context: ["employee_level", "timeline"] retry_config: max_attempts: 2 backoff: exponential observability: log_level: info metrics: [invocation_count, success_rate, latency]

Performance Management Skill

Purpose

Provide engineering managers with frameworks for effective performance management, goal-setting, OKRs, reviews, and continuous feedback.

Primary Bond

Agent: hiring-performance-agent Relationship: This skill provides review templates, OKR frameworks, and feedback models that the agent uses.

Templates

OKR Template

okr_template:
  metadata:
    owner: "{Name}"
    quarter: "{Q1 2025}"
    created: "{Date}"
    last_reviewed: "{Date}"

  objective:
    statement: "{Qualitative, inspirational goal}"
    why: "{Why this matters to team/company}"

  key_results:
    kr1:
      metric: "{Specific measurable outcome}"
      baseline: "{Where we are today}"
      target: "{Where we want to be}"
      current: null
      confidence: "70%"
      initiatives:
        - "{Action to achieve this}"

    kr2:
      metric: "{Another measurable outcome}"
      baseline: "{Current state}"
      target: "{Target state}"
      current: null
      confidence: "70%"

    kr3:
      metric: "{Third measurable outcome}"
      baseline: "{Current}"
      target: "{Target}"
      current: null
      confidence: "70%"

  scoring:
    "0.0-0.3": "Failed to make progress"
    "0.4-0.6": "Made progress but fell short"
    "0.7-0.9": "Delivered (target zone)"
    "1.0": "Fully achieved (might not have been ambitious enough)"

  review_cadence:
    weekly: "Quick progress check"
    monthly: "Deep review, adjust if needed"
    quarterly: "Final scoring and retrospective"

Performance Review Template

performance_review:
  metadata:
    employee: "{Name}"
    level: "{Current level}"
    manager: "{Manager name}"
    review_period: "{Date range}"
    review_date: "{Date}"

  overall_rating:
    scale: "[1-5]"
    rating: null
    summary: ""

  rating_definitions:
    5: "Exceptional - Top 5%, role model, exceptional impact"
    4: "Exceeds - Frequently exceeds expectations"
    3: "Meets - Consistently meets expectations"
    2: "Developing - Partially meets, improving"
    1: "Below - Does not meet, action needed"

  goal_review:
    goal_1:
      description: "{Goal from last review}"
      target: "{What success looked like}"
      result: "{What was achieved}"
      rating: null
      learning: ""

    goal_2:
      description: ""
      target: ""
      result: ""
      rating: null

  competency_assessment:
    technical_excellence:
      rating: null
      strengths: []
      growth_areas: []
      evidence: ""

    collaboration:
      rating: null
      strengths: []
      growth_areas: []
      evidence: ""

    communication:
      rating: null
      strengths: []
      growth_areas: []
      evidence: ""

    ownership:
      rating: null
      strengths: []
      growth_areas: []
      evidence: ""

    impact:
      rating: null
      strengths: []
      growth_areas: []
      evidence: ""

  peer_feedback_summary:
    themes: []
    quotes: []

  development_plan:
    strengths_to_leverage: []
    focus_areas:
      - area: ""
        action: ""
        timeline: ""
        success_metric: ""
    support_needed: []
    resources: []

  next_period_goals:
    goal_1:
      description: ""
      success_criteria: ""
      alignment: ""

  career_discussion:
    aspirations: ""
    timeline_to_next_level: ""
    gaps_to_address: []

Continuous Feedback (SBI Model)

sbi_feedback:
  model:
    situation: "In {specific context/meeting/moment}..."
    behavior: "I observed/noticed {specific observable behavior}..."
    impact: "The impact was {effect on team/project/individual}..."

  examples:
    positive:
      situation: "In yesterday's design review"
      behavior: "you asked probing questions that helped us identify a critical edge case"
      impact: "which likely saved us a week of rework and improved the design"

    constructive:
      situation: "In the last sprint planning"
      behavior: "you committed to more story points than you could complete"
      impact: "which meant the team had to scramble to cover, affecting our sprint goal"

  best_practices:
    - "Be specific (not 'you're doing great' but 'your documentation was thorough')"
    - "Be timely (within 48 hours of the event)"
    - "Focus on behavior (not personality)"
    - "Be balanced (both positive and constructive)"
    - "Make it a conversation (not a lecture)"

Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)

performance_improvement_plan:
  metadata:
    employee: "{Name}"
    manager: "{Name}"
    hr_partner: "{Name}"
    start_date: "{Date}"
    end_date: "{Date}"
    duration: "{30/60/90 days}"

  performance_concerns:
    concern_1:
      area: "{Specific area of concern}"
      examples:
        - "{Specific instance with date}"
        - "{Another specific instance}"
      expected_standard: "{What 'good' looks like}"

    concern_2:
      area: ""
      examples: []
      expected_standard: ""

  improvement_goals:
    goal_1:
      description: "{Specific, measurable improvement}"
      success_criteria: "{How we'll know it's achieved}"
      timeline: "{When by}"
      support_provided: "{Training, mentoring, etc.}"

    goal_2:
      description: ""
      success_criteria: ""
      timeline: ""
      support_provided: ""

  check_in_schedule:
    - date: "{Week 1}"
      focus: "{Initial check-in}"
    - date: "{Week 2}"
      focus: "{Progress review}"
    - date: "{Midpoint}"
      focus: "{Formal midpoint review}"
    - date: "{Final}"
      focus: "{Final evaluation}"

  outcomes:
    successful: "Return to good standing, continue employment"
    unsuccessful: "Separation from company"

  acknowledgement:
    employee_signature: ""
    manager_signature: ""
    date: ""

Decision Trees

Rating Calibration

Individual assessment complete
|
+-- Compare to level expectations
|   +-- Exceeds level consistently? -> Consider 4 or 5
|   +-- Meets level consistently? -> 3
|   +-- Below level? -> 2 or below
|
+-- Compare to peers at same level
|   +-- Top quartile? -> Lean toward 4+
|   +-- Middle half? -> Likely 3
|   +-- Bottom quartile? -> Likely 2 or below
|
+-- Review evidence quality
|   +-- Specific examples documented? -> Trust rating
|   +-- Vague or missing? -> Reconsider, gather more
|
+-- Final calibration with peers
    +-- Adjust for consistency across org

When to Start PIP

Performance concern identified
|
+-- Is this a new issue?
|   +-- Yes -> Give feedback, set expectations, monitor
|   +-- No -> Continue
|
+-- Has feedback been given previously?
|   +-- No -> Give clear feedback first, document
|   +-- Yes -> Continue
|
+-- Has there been time to improve (4-8 weeks)?
|   +-- No -> Allow time, provide support
|   +-- Yes -> Continue
|
+-- Is there a pattern of underperformance?
|   +-- No -> May be temporary, continue coaching
|   +-- Yes -> Consider PIP
|
+-- Is the issue coachable?
    +-- Yes -> Start PIP with clear goals
    +-- No -> May need immediate action (HR consult)

Anti-Patterns

anti_patterns:
  recency_bias:
    symptom: "Only remembering last month of performance"
    remedy:
      - "Keep running notes throughout period"
      - "Review goals quarterly"
      - "Collect feedback continuously"

  rating_inflation:
    symptom: "Everyone is 'exceeds expectations'"
    remedy:
      - "Calibration sessions"
      - "Distribution guidelines"
      - "Manager training"

  surprise_reviews:
    symptom: "First time hearing about issues at review"
    remedy:
      - "Continuous feedback culture"
      - "Monthly check-ins on goals"
      - "No surprises rule"

  personality_focus:
    symptom: "Rating the person, not the work"
    remedy:
      - "Evidence-based reviews"
      - "Specific examples required"
      - "Behavior focus"

Quick Reference Cards

Goal-Setting (SMART)

S - Specific: Clear and well-defined
M - Measurable: Quantifiable outcomes
A - Achievable: Realistic but challenging
R - Relevant: Aligned with team/company goals
T - Time-bound: Clear deadline

Example:
Bad: "Improve code quality"
Good: "Reduce production incidents by 30% in Q2
       by implementing automated testing for
       critical paths, measured by PagerDuty data"

Feedback Frequency

Type	Cadence	Format
Quick praise	Daily	Slack/in-person
Constructive	Within 48h of event	Private 1-on-1
Goal progress	Weekly in 1-on-1	Documented
Formal review	Semi-annual	Written + meeting

Distribution Guidelines

Rating	Target %	Description
5	~5%	Exceptional, role model
4	~20%	Exceeds consistently
3	~50%	Meets expectations fully
2	~20%	Developing, improving
1	~5%	Below, needs action

Troubleshooting

Problem	Root Cause	Solution
Goals not achieved	Unclear or unrealistic	Use SMART, check in weekly
Surprises at review	No ongoing feedback	Continuous feedback culture
Rating disagreements	Different standards	Calibration sessions
PIP fails	Wrong fit, not coachable	Better hiring, earlier intervention

Validation Rules

input_validation:
  review_type:
    type: enum
    values: [annual, mid_year, quarterly, pip]
    required: true

  employee_level:
    type: enum
    values: [junior, mid, senior, staff, principal, manager]
    required: false

  timeline:
    type: enum
    values: [30_day, 60_day, 90_day]
    required: false

Resources

Books:

Measure What Matters - John Doerr
Radical Candor - Kim Scott
High Output Management - Andy Grove
The Effective Manager - Mark Horstman

Frameworks:

OKR methodology (Google, Intel)
SMART goals
SBI feedback model

performance-management

$ Installer