reph

Templates · People

Performance review template

Self and manager review against goals and values

Start with this template →Sign in

Opens on reph with the template ready to start. No account needed; sign in to keep your document.

Use it when

A review cycle is due and you need a self review and a manager review against the goals agreed at the start of the period

Who it's for

ManagerEngineering managerTech lead

Filled example

The template filled in for a made-up company, so you can see what good looks like.

Performance review: H1 2026

Employee: Ravi Kapoor · Reviewer: Elena Novak · Date: 15 July 2026

Period

  • Cycle: 1 January to 30 June 2026 (H1)

Goals review

Goal Outcome Rating
Ship the Fernhill mobile checkout redesign by end of Q1 Shipped 24 March, one week late. Conversion on mobile up from 2.1% to 2.6%. Met
Cut p95 checkout API latency below 400 ms Down from 720 ms to 380 ms after the cart caching work Exceeded
Mentor one junior engineer through their first on-call Paired with Jun for the full rotation; Jun now on-calls solo Met
Write the payments retry RFC Draft started, not reviewed Not met

Strengths

  • Turns vague problems into measured ones. The latency goal started as "checkout feels slow"; Ravi added the tracing that showed 60% of the time was cart recomputation.
  • Calm in incidents. During the 11 April payment provider outage he ran comms to Support every 20 minutes without being asked.

Growth areas

  • Finishing written work. The retry RFC sat in draft for ten weeks. Better looks like sharing a rough draft in week one and letting review shape it.
  • Estimating. The checkout redesign slipped a week because QA on older Android devices was not in the plan.

Values & behaviours

  • "Default to open": posted weekly progress notes in the team channel all half, which other squads now copy.
  • Gave direct, kind feedback in two design reviews that changed the outcome.

Self-reflection

  • Proud of the latency work and of how Jun's on-call went. I underestimated how much the RFC needed other people's input, and I kept polishing it alone. I'd like to lead a cross-team project in H2.

Manager summary

  • A strong half. Ravi delivered three of four goals, exceeded on the hardest one, and raised the bar for how the team communicates. The RFC miss and the estimate slip share a root cause (working alone too long), which is the main thing to change in H2. Overall rating: Exceeds expectations.

Next-period goals

Sign-off

Name Role Status Notes
Ravi Kapoor Employee Acknowledged Agrees with the summary
Elena Novak Reviewer Signed

The template

Show the blank template

Performance review

Employee: [employee] · Reviewer: [your name] · Date: [date]

Period

The exact window under review. Reviews that drift into "this whole year, vaguely" reward recency bias.

  • Cycle:

Goals review

Rate against what was actually committed to at the start of the period, not a moving target.

Goal Outcome Rating

Strengths

Specific, evidenced examples. "Great communicator" without an example is not feedback.

Growth areas

Named plainly, with what better looks like. Vague growth areas produce no growth.

Values & behaviours

How they showed up, not just what they shipped. The how matters for team health.

Self-reflection

Written by the employee before the manager section, which protects it from being anchored by the manager's view.

Manager summary

The overall narrative and rating, written after reading the self-reflection, not before.

Next-period goals

2-4 goals, each checkable at the next review. Anything vaguer than that isn't a goal.

Sign-off

Both people confirm they have read the review. Acknowledging is not agreeing; disagreement goes in the notes.

Name Role Status Notes
[employee] Employee Pending
[your name] Reviewer Pending

Questions

Who writes first?
The employee writes the self reflection before the manager drafts, so it is not anchored
How do I avoid recency bias?
Keep notes through the period and cite examples from every month, not just the last one
Who can see the review?
The employee, their manager and HR, so keep the doc private to those three

Fill it with your agent

Connect Claude to reph over MCP, then paste this. The draft arrives as suggestions you accept or reject section by section. How to connect Claude.

Find my reph doc "Performance review" with search_docs, then read it with read_doc. Draft Goals review and Strengths from the period's goals doc, shipped project docs and 1:1 notes I name, one concrete example per claim. Leave Self-reflection, ratings and Manager summary empty; no verbatim peer feedback, health, leave or personal details. File it with suggest_edit, one replace_section op per section (heading line kept) so each can be accepted alone. Ask each open question (goals lacking evidence) with add_comment quoting that section's heading line, then call request_review with a one-line summary.

Related templates

1:1 notes

Recurring 1:1 agenda: wins, blockers, growth, action items

ManagerEngineering managerTech lead

Hiring debrief

Structured hiring debrief: independent panel scores recorded before discussion, evidence by competency, concerns, a bias check and the hire or no hire decision

RecruiterManagerEngineering managerTech lead

Interview scorecard

Structured evaluation against role competencies

RecruiterManagerEngineering managerTech lead

Job description

Role summary, responsibilities, requirements and benefits

RecruiterManagerFounder

Onboarding plan

30/60/90 day plan for a new teammate

ManagerEngineering managerTech leadOperations

Team charter

A team's mission, scope, members and roles, ways of working, rituals, decision rights and how to reach them

ManagerEngineering managerTech leadAnyone

Start with this template →Sign in