Performance Management without Ritual
By Redaktion techport.ai, HR-Beratung · Last updated on
Once a year, the manager and employee meet for an appraisal. Both have the form from the previous year in front of them, both know that the outcome changes little, and both are glad when it's over. Three months later, a conflict arises, and the HR department looks for documentation. They find three sentences and a cross next to “meets expectations”.
Performance management should achieve three things: let people know where they stand; establish a comprehensible basis for development and remuneration; and, in case of conflict, provide evidence of what was discussed. The annual appraisal usually achieves none of these.
How you can tell
- Evaluations are distributed differently in each area. In one area, everyone is above average.
- Salary decisions are justified by performance, but performance evaluations are not documented.
- Managers perceive the process as an obligation, employees as a judgment.
- Objectives are agreed in January and looked at again for the first time in December.
Why this happens
An annual rhythm suits a world of work where tasks change annually. Such a world barely exists anymore. In addition, evaluation and salary are negotiated in one discussion, which makes any honest feedback impossible. And documentation suffers because it takes place in forms that no one re-opens.
Our approach
- Clarify purpose. Development, remuneration, and documentation require different discussions. We separate them and define for each: who conducts it, how often, and with what outcome.
- Define rhythm and content. Short quarterly discussions about objectives and progress, an annual development discussion, and a separate remuneration round. Objectives are tied to team and company goals; otherwise, they are merely occupational therapy.
- Calibrate. Before evaluations become effective, managers in an area compare them among themselves. This is the most effective protection against leniency in one area and strictness in another, and it becomes important for pay transparency when performance is supposed to explain salary differences.
- Document in the system. Discussions, objectives, evaluations, and agreements are recorded in the HR system, confirmed by both parties, and accessible at any time. This ensures documentation holds up when needed.
What you gain from this
- Employees know where they stand before the salary round decides.
- Salary differences can be explained with documented performance, which has become more important since the Federal Labour Court's ruling on comparative cases.
- In case of conflict, a complete history is available, without anyone having to compile it retrospectively.
From our projects
In performance management projects, the calibration round is the moment when managers first see how differently they evaluate. The distributions between areas often deviate so strongly that salary decisions based on them would not be defensible. The second experience: Separating development discussions from remuneration rounds changes the discussions more than any new form.
Good to know
Principles for appraisals are subject to co-determination by the works council in accordance with § 94 Betriebsverfassungsgesetz (BetrVG) [Works Constitution Act], and a performance system that collects data on performance is subject to co-determination in accordance with § 87 Absatz 1 Nummer 6 BetrVG. Anyone changing the procedure should amend the works agreement beforehand. Systems that assess performance using AI also fall under the high-risk category of the AI Regulation.
Frequently asked questions
Should we abolish rating scales entirely?
Not if compensation or promotion depends on them. In that case, you need a comprehensible classification. What should be abolished is the mixing of development discussions and appraisals in a single meeting.
How do we get managers to provide regular feedback?
By making the process short, providing system reminders, and ensuring consequences. A twenty-minute quarterly review with three questions is realistic. A twelve-page form is not.
Let's talk about Performance Management without Ritual
In a thirty-minute first call we clarify where your biggest lever is and whether we are the right partner for it.
Further reading
Back to the field Onboarding and Development
Sources
- § 94 BetrVG, personnel questionnaire, appraisal principles
- § 87 BetrVG, co-determination rights
- Bundesarbeitsgericht [Federal Labour Court], judgement of 23 October 2025, 8 AZR 300/24 (equal pay, pair comparison)